>  bound  together  .net      .75 


NEW  GUIDES  TO  OLD  MASTERS 

By  John  C.  Van  Dtkb 

PRICE 

I.  London — National  Gallery,  Wallace  Collection. 
With  a  General  Introduction  and  Bibliog- 
raphy for  the  Series net  $1.00 

II.    Paris — Louvre net      .75 

III.  Amsterdam — Rljks  Museum"^ 

The  Hague — Royal  Gallery    >  bound  together  .  net      .75 
Haarlem — Hals  Museum       J 

IV.  Brussels — Royal  Museum 
Antwerp — Royal  Museum 

V.     Munich — Old  Pinacothek      ^ 

Frankfort — Staedel  Institute  >  bound  together  .  net    1.00 

Cassel — Royal  Gallery  ) 

VI.     BerZm— Kaisep-Friedrich      "j 

Museum  >  bound  together  .net    1.00 

Dresden — Royal  Gallery        ) 

VII.     Vienna — Imperial  Gallery    ^ 

Budapest — Museum  of  Fine  >  bound  together  .net    1.00 

Arts  ) 

VIII.     St.  Petersburg — Hermitage In  Press 

IX.     Venice — Academy  ") .        j  ^      ^i.  t     t^ 

,,.,        „         X.  ,j,  T>        „> bound  together  .    In  Press 
Milan — Brera,  Poldi-Pezzoli )  ^ 

X.     Florence — Uflazi,  Pitti,  Academy      .      ...    In  Press 

XI.     Rome — Vatican,  Borghese  Gallery   .     ...   In  Press 

XII.     Madrid — ^Prado In  Press 


KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 


ROYAL  GALLERY,  DRESDEN 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcliive.org/details/berlinnotesOOvandricli 


Phologt-nphische  GeseUnchaft,  Berlin 


giorgioxe:     portrait  of  a  man 
Kaiser-Friedrich  Museum,  Berlin 


NEW     GUIDES      TO     OLD      MASTERS 

BERLIN,  DRESDEN 

CRITICAL  NOTES  ON  THE  KAISER-FRIEDRICH 

MUSEUM  AND  THE  ROYAL  GALLERY, 

DRESDEN 


BY 

JOHN  C.  VAN  DYKE 

n 

AUTHOB  OF  "  ART  FOB  ABT  S  BAKE,      "  THE  UEANIMO  OF  FICTUBXB, 

"HI8TOBT  OF  PAINTING,"    "OLD  DUTCH  AND 

FLEMISH   1IA8TEB8,"   ETC. 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS 

1914 


Copyright,  1914,  bt 
CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S  SONS 


Published  May,  1914 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

There  are  numerous  guide-books,  catalogues,  and 
histories  of  the  European  galleries,  but,  unfortunately 
for  the  gallery  visitor,  they  are  either  wholly  descrip- 
tive of  obvious  facts  or  they  are  historical  and  ar- 
chaeological about  matters  somewhat  removed  from  art 
itself.  In  them  the  gist  of  a  picture — its  value  or  mean- 
ing as  art — is  usually  passed  over  in  silence.  It  seems 
that  there  is  some  need  of  a  guide  that  shall  say  less 
about  the  well-worn  saints  and  more  about  the  man 
behind  the  paint-brush;  that  shall  deal  with  pictures 
from  the  painter's  point  of  view,  rather  than  that  of 
the  ecclesiastic,  the  archaeologist,  or  the  literary  ro- 
mancer; that  shall  have  some  sense  of  proportion  in 
the  selection  and  criticism  of  pictures;  that  shall  have 
a  critical  basis  for  discrimination  between  the  good  and 
the  bad;  and  that  shall,  for  these  reasons,  be  of  ser- 
vice to  the  travelling  public  as  well  as  to  the  art  student. 

This  series  of  guide-books  attempts  to  meet  these 
requirements.  They  deal  only  with  the  so-called  "old 
masters."  When  the  old  masters  came  upon  the 
scene,  flourished,  and  ceased  to  exist  may  be  deter- 
mined by  their  spirit  as  well  as  by  their  dates.  In 
Italy  the  tradition  of  the  craft  had  been  estabhshed 
before  Giotto  and  was  carried  on  by  Benozzo,  Botti- 

V 


5^qqc:q/1 


vi  PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

celli,  Raphael,  Titian,  Tintoretto,  even  down  to  Tie- 
polo  in  the  eighteenth  century.  But  the  late  men, 
the  men  of  the  Decadence,  are  not  mentioned  here 
because  of  their  exaggerated  sentiment,  their  inferior 
workmanship — in  short,  the  decay  of  the  tradition  of 
the  craft.  In  France  the  fifteenth-century  primitives 
are  considered,  and  also  the  sixteenth-century  men, 
including  Claude  and  Poussin;  but  the  work  of  the 
Rigauds,  Mignards,  Coypels,  Watteaus,  and  Bouchers 
seems  of  a  distinctly  modern  spirit  and  does  not  be- 
long here.  This  is  equally  true  of  all  English  painting 
from  Hogarth  to  the  present  time.  In  Spain  we  stop 
with  the  School  of  Velasquez,  in  Germany  and  the 
Low  Countries  with  the  seventeenth-century  men. 
The  modern  painters,  down  to  the  present  day,  so  far 
as  they  are  found  in  the  public  galleries  of  Europe, 
will  perhaps  form  a  separate  guide-book,  which  by  its 
very  limitation  to  modern  painting  can  be  better 
treated  by  itself. 

Only  the  best  pictures  among  the  old  masters  are 
chosen  for  comment.  This  does  not  mean,  however, 
that  only  the  great  masterpieces  have  been  considered. 
There  are,  for  instance,  notes  upon  some  three  hun- 
dred pictures  in  the  Venice  Academy,  upon  five  hun- 
dred in  the  Uffizi  Gallery,  and  some  six  hundred  in 
the  Louvre  or  the  National  Gallery,  London.  Other 
galleries  are  treated  in  the  same  proportion.  But  it 
has  not  been  thought  worth  while  to  delve  deeply  into 
the  paternity  of  pictures  by  third-rate  primitives  or 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES  vii 

to  give  space  to  mediocre  or  ruined  examples  by  even 
celebrated  painters.  The  merits  that  now  exist  in  a 
canvas,  and  can  be  seen  by  any  intelligent  observer, 
are  the  features  insisted  upon  herein. 

In  giving  the  relative  rank  of  pictures,  a  system  of 
starring  has  been  followed. 

Mention  without  a  star  indicates  a  picture  of  merit, 
otherwise  it  would  not  have  been  selected  from  the 
given  collection  at  all. 

One  star  (*)  means  a  picture  of  more  than  average 
importance,  whether  it  be  by  a  great  or  by  a  medi- 
ocre painter. 

Two  stars  (**)  indicates  a  work  of  high  rank  as  art, 
quite  regardless  of  its  painter's  name,  and  may  be  given 
to  a  picture  attributed  to  a  school  or  by  a  painter  un- 
known. 

Three  stars  (***)  signifies  a  great  masterpiece. 

The  length  of  each  note  and  its  general  tenor  will  in 
most  cases  suggest  the  relative  importance  of  the  picture. 

Catalogues  of  the  galleries  should  be  used  in  con- 
nection with  these  guide-books,  for  they  contain  much 
information  not  repeated  here.  The  gallery  catalogues 
are  usually  arranged  alphabetically  under  the  painters' 
names,  although  there  are  some  of  them  that  make 
reference  by  school,  or  room,  or  number,  according  to 
the  hanging  of  the  pictures  in  the  gallery.  But  the 
place  where  the  picture  may  be  hung  is  constantly 
shifting;  its  number,  too,  may  be  subject  to  alteration 
with  each  new  edition  of  the  catalogue;  but  its  painter's 


viii  PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

name  is  perhaps  less  liable  to  change.  An  arrangement, 
therefore,  by  the  painters'  names  placed  alphabetically 
has  been  necessarily  adopted  in  these  guide-books. 
Usually  the  prefixes  "de,"  "di/'  "van/'  and  "von" 
have  been  disregarded  in  the  arrangement  of  the  names. 
And  usually,  also,  the  more  familiar  name  of  the  artist 
is  used — that  is,  Botticelli,  not  Filipepi;  Correggio,  not 
AUegri;  Tintoretto,  not  Robusti.  In  practical  use  the 
student  can  ascertain  from  the  picture-frame  the  name 
of  the  painter  and  turn  to  it  alphabetically  in  this  guide- 
book. In  case  the  name  has  been  recently  changed, 
he  can  take  the  number  from  the  frame  and,  by  turning 
to  the  numerical  index  at  the  end  of  each  volume,  can 
ascertain  the  former  name  and  thus  the  alphabetical 
place  of  the  note  about  that  particular  picture. 

The  picture  appears  under  the  name  or  attribution 
given  in  the  catalogue.  If  there  is  no  catalogue,  then 
the  name  on  the  frame  is  taken.  But  that  does  not 
necessarily  mean  that  the  name  or  attribution  is 
accepted  in  the  notes.  Differences  of  view  are  given 
very  frequently.  It  is  important  that  we  should  know 
the  painter  of  the  picture  before  us.  The  question  of 
attribution  is  very  much  in  the  air  to-day,  and  consider- 
able space  is  devoted  to  it  not  only  in  the  General  In- 
troduction but  in  the  notes  themselves.  Occasionally, 
however,  the  whole  question  of  authorship  is  passed 
over  in  favour  of  the  beauty  of  the  picture  itself.  It 
is  always  the  art  of  the  picture  we  are  seeking,  more 
than  its  name,  or  pedigree,  or  commercial  value. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES  ix 

Conciseness  herein  has  been  a  necessity.  These 
notes  are  suggestions  for  study  or  thought  rather  than 
complete  statements  about  the  pictures.  Even  the 
matter  of  an  attribution  is  often  dismissed  in  a  sentence 
though  it  may  have  been  thought  over  for  weeks. 
If  the  student  would  go  to  the  bottom  of  things  he 
must  read  further  and  do  some  investigating  on  his 
own  account.  The  lives  of  the  painters,  the  history  of 
the  schools,  the  opinions  of  the  connoisseurs  may  be 
read  elsewhere.  A  bibliography,  in  the  London  vol- 
ume, will  suggest  the  best  among  the  available  books 
in  both  history  and  criticism. 

The  proper  test  of  a  guide-book  is  its  use.  These 
notes  were  written  in  the  galleries  and  before  the  pic- 
tures. I  have  not  trusted  my  memory  about  them,  nor 
shall  I  trust  the  memory  of  that  man  who,  from  his 
easy  chair,  declares  he  knows  the  pictures  by  heart. 
The  opinions  and  conclusions  herein  have  not  been 
lightly  arrived  at.  Indeed,  they  are  the  result  of  more 
than  thirty  years*  study  of  the  European  galleries. 
That  they  are  often  diametrically  opposed  to  current 
views  and  beliefs  should  not  be  cause  for  dismissing 
them  from  consideration.  Examine  the  pictures,  guide- 
book in  hand.  That  is  the  test  to  which  I  submit  and 
which  I  exact. 

Yet  with  this  insistence  made,  one  must  still  feel 
apologetic  or  at  least  sceptical  about  results.  However 
accurate  one  would  be  as  to  fact,  it  is  obviously  impos- 
sible to  handle  so  many  titles,  names,  and  numbers 


X  PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

without  an  occasional  failure  of  the  eye  or  a  slip  of  the 
pen;  and  however  frankly  fair  in  criticism  one  may 
fancy  himself,  it  is  again  impossible  to  formulate  judg- 
ments on,  say,  ten  thousand  pictures  without  here  and 
there  committing  blunders.  These  difficulties  may  be 
obviated  in  future  editions.  If  opinions  herein  are 
found  to  be  wrong,  they  will  be  edited  out  of  the  work 
just  as  quickly  as  errors  of  fact.  The  reach  is  toward 
a  reliable  guide  though  the  grasp  may  fall  short  of  full 
attainment. 

It  remains  to  be  said  that  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  and 
Mrs.  George  B.  McClellan  for  helpful  suggestions  re- 
garding this  series,  and  to  Mr.  Sydney  Philip  Noe  not 
only  for  good  counsel  but  for  practical  assistance  in 
copying  manuscript  and  reading  proof. 

John  C,  Van  Dyke. 

RtTTQEBS  COLLBQE,  1914. 


KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 


NOTE  ON  THE  KAISER-FRIEDRICH 
MUSEUM 

Almost  every  student  of  art  will  testify  to  the  excel- 
lence of  the  Kaiser-Friedrich  Museum  as  a  place  for 
study.  It  is  the  most  satisfactory  gallery  in  Europe  in 
this  respect.  This  is  not  alone  due  to  its  large  variety 
of  pictures  but  to  the  proper  showing  of  the  pictures 
and  the  excellent  arrangement  of  the  gallery.  The  build- 
ing is  new  and  was  specially  designed  for  a  museum. 
The  rooms  vary  in  size  and  avoid  monotony;  the  light- 
ing is  very  good  and  the  walls  in  neutral  tints  are 
inconspicuous.  The  pictures  are  arranged  in  rooms 
by  schools  and  countries,  and  with  them  are  placed 
bronzes,  bas-reliefs,  friezes,  doorways,  hangings,  chairs, 
tables,  chests — things  of  the  period  that  give  a  setting, 
a  milieu,  for  the  pictures.  The  effect  is  to  put  one 
back  in  the  days  of  the  old  masters  and  to  quicken 
comprehension  of  art  motives  and  methods.  In  the 
central  part  of  the  building  is  an  Italian  church  arrange- 
ment with  chapels,  altars  and  altar-pieces,  coats  of 
arms,  hangings  that  recall  the  Italian  churches  and 
show  how  art  was  used  in  them.  These  are  decided  in- 
novations in  museum  management  and  they  are  very 
successful. 

How  successful  every  one  knows  who  remembers  the 
3 


,f  ;N0TB.<>5^:'THS  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

pictures  as  they  appeared  in  the  old  museum.  When 
they  were  taken  to  the  new  building  and  hung  in  their 
present  places  they  were  hardly  recognisable  so  aston- 
ishingly had  they  improved  in  appearance.  In  the 
early  days  the  gallery  was  considered  excellent  in  the 
representation  of  the  schools  but  not  remarkable  for 
its  masterpieces;  but  to-day  one  realises  that  some 
of  these  same  pictures  are  really  great  works.  Add 
to  this  improvement  in  the  setting  of  the  pictures  the 
constant  gathering  in  of  new  and  important  works 
and  you  have  one  of  the  most  notable  collections  of 
paintings  in  existence. 

The  gallery,  as  a  whole,  has  been  made  by  purchase 
within  the  last  century.  The  Giustiniani  Collection, 
bought  in  1815,  the  Solly  Collection,  bought  in  1821, 
a  selection  of  pictures  from  the  royal  palaces  in  1829 
formed  the  nucleus;  but  the  later  additions,  including 
the  Suermondt  Collection  in  1874,  and  purchases  of  in- 
dividual works  from  collectors  and  at  auction  sales  have 
made  the  museum  not  only  famous  but  of  the  greatest 
importance  to  the  student.  For  the  policy  of  making 
the  collection  illustrative  of  the  entire  history  of  art  is 
still  in  force.  There  are  now  here  many  examples  of 
painters  not  seen  elsewhere,  and  the  fiUing-in  process, 
completing  the  representation  of  each  school,  is  still 
going  on.  The  Berlin  Museum  is  possibly  more  active 
in  making  acquisitions  than  any  gallery  in  Europe. 

As  one  goes  through  the  gallery  he  is  perhaps  amazed 
at  the  great  number  of  notable  pictures.     Especially 


NOTE  ON  THE  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM     5 

is  this  true  of  the  pictures  in  the  Italian  Schools.  There 
are  two  rooms  filled  with  Primitives  and  many  pictures 
by  such  fifteenth-century  men  as  Squarcione,  Mantegna, 
Antonello  da  Messina,  Bellini,  Cima,  Tura,  Cossa, 
Zoppo,  Piero  di  Cosimo,  Signorelli,  PoUajuolo,  Filippino, 
Fra  Filippo,  Botticelli,  Domenico  Veneziano.  Nothing 
could  be  finer  than  the  works  by  some  of  these  men — 
especially  the  great  altar-piece  by  Tura,  the  excellent 
Mantegnas,  the  fine  profile  by  Domenico  Veneziano,  the 
rare  Madonna  by  Squarcione,  the  powerful  Signorelli 
tondo.  Among  the  sixteenth-century  masters  there  is 
a  group  of  five  Raphaels,  all  of  them  early;  a  famous 
Correggio;  two  excellent  Lottos;  half  a  dozen  Titians, 
of  which  three  at  least  are  masterful  in  every  way;  a 
romantic  Giorgione  portrait  (shown  as  the  frontispiece 
to  this  volume) ;  one  superb  Palma;  some  fine  Tintorettos ; 
and  an  entire  room  decoration  by  Tiepolo. 

This  remarkable  representation  of  the  Italians  does 
not  eclipse  or  dwarf  the  Early  Flemish  School  of  which 
there  are  many  examples,  beginning  with  the  greater 
part  of  the  celebrated  St.  Bavon  altar-piece  by  the 
Van  Eycks.  Bouts  is  here  in  all  his  glory  of  colour, 
with  Christus,  Memling,  Van  der  Weyden,  Metsys, 
Gossart.  Here,  too,  is  a  fine  picture  by  a  rare  master, 
Ouwater,  and  two  panels  by  an  equally  rare  painter 
and  past  master  of  technique,  Marmion.  Of  the  later 
Flemings  there  are  twenty-six  pictures  put  down  to 
Rubens,  some  of  them  of  the  finest  quality,  and  a 
dozen  examples  of  Van  Dyck,  some  of  these  again  being 


6     NOTE  ON  THE  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

in  his  best  style.  The  German  Schools  are  very  much 
in  evidence,  though  the  early  altar-pieces  such  as 
the  Munich  Gallery  possesses  are  scarce.  Altdorfer, 
Burgkmair,  Cranach,  are  well  shown — the  last-named 
in  one  or  two  astonishing  panels.  Holbein  and  Diirer 
are,  of  course,  present  in  half  a  dozen  examples. 

Among  the  minor  Dutchmen  there  is  a  beautiful 
picture  of  a  Lady  with  Pearls  by  Vermeer  of  Delft,  a 
fine  Terborch,  several  excellent  Brouwers,  Ostades, 
Steens,  an  unusual  Keyser,  a  strong  Rembrandtesque 
Backer,  a  dozen  Ruisdaels.  Hals  is  credited  with  a 
number  of  fine  pictures  but  one  cannot  be  certain  that 
he  did  them  all.  This  is  equally  true  of  the  twenty-six 
Rembrandts.  Among  them  are  a  few  works  of  great 
power;  for  instances,  the  Man  with  the  Golden  Helmet 
and  the  Portrait  of  Hendrickje  Stoffels;  but  the  major- 
ity of  them  are  disappointing  as  art  and  their  origin 
with  Rembrandt  is  by  no  means  beyond  dispute. 

The  catalogue  (in  German)  is  concise,  accurate,  and 
scholarly.  One  may  not  always  agree  with  its  conclu- 
sions or  its  attributions  and  yet  have  a  profound  re- 
spect for  its  opinions.  It  has  been  prepared  with  care 
and  is  subject  to  continual  revision.  It  is  arranged 
alphabetically  under  the  painters'  names.  Some  edi- 
tions carry  illustrations.  One  expensive  volume  has 
illustrations  of  every  picture  in  the  gallery  belonging 
to  the  Northern  Schools.  Photographs  are  sold  at  the 
door.  Hanfstaengl  has  a  volume  of  reproductions  of 
the  pictures  to  be  had  for  a  few  marks. 


KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

719.    Aertsen,     Pieter.      Young     Woman    and    Child, 

Rather  coarsely  done  and  savagely  drawn,  giving 
an  inadequate  notion  of  Aertsen  as  he  is  to  be  seen 
at  Brussels,  for  instance.  But  there  is  vigorous 
work  about  it  and  in  it.  Perhaps  a  part  of  an 
altar-piece. 

1076.    Alegretto  Nuzi.     Madonna  with  Two  Saints,     An 

excellent  example  of  early  Umbrian  work  in  good 
condition.  The  colour  of  the  robe  and  the  patterns 
at  the  back  should  be  noticed.  The  Christ  on  the 
Cross  (No.  1078)  is  of  the  same  character.  Both 
of  them  are  pyramidal  compositions. 

638b.  Altdorf er,  Albrecht.  Rest  in  Egypt,  A  beauti- 
ful piece  of  colour  disturbed  by  too  many  stick-like 
details  at  the  right.     The  landscape  is  most  inter- 

Pesting  as  also  the  small  angels  on  the  edge  of  the 
fountain.  Notice  the  drawing  of  the  mountain 
forms  in  the  distance. 

638.    St.  Francis  and  St.  Jerome.     The  landscapes 

are  rather  fine  in  colour  if  a  little  restless.  The 
figures  belong  with  them  and  are  parts  of  them,  for 
Altdorfer  was  perhaps  more  of  a  landscape  painter 
than  a  figure  painter. 

638e.  The  Birth  of  Christ.  It  is  quaint  and  Ger- 
manic in  conception  not  only  as  to  the  ruin  but  as 
to  the  singing  angels  in  the  sky  and  even  the  sun. 
But  what  fine  art  it  is!  In  the  painter's  middle 
period. 

7 


I  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

638c.    Landscape  with  Figures.     A  masterful  little 

piece  that  tells  an  unusual  narrative  or  illustrates 
a  proverb  in  the  beggars  riding  on  the  royal  train. 
What  strange  architecture  and  what  an  interesting 
landscape! 

638d.   Crucifixion.     Beautiful  in  the  colour  of  the 

robes,  the  figures  on  the  crosses,  and  in  the  land- 
scape. See  also  the  landscape  No.  638a.  All  of 
Altdorfer's  works  are  worthy  of  study,  for  he  has 
the  true  spirit  of  art.  Never  mind  about  his  Ger- 
manic types — that  is,  do  not  be  disturbed  by  them. 
They  are  to  be  admired  for  their  sincerity  and 
truth  to  a  point  of  view. 

556.  Amberger,  ChristOph.  Portrait  of  Charles  V. 
This  is  a  different  personality  from  Titian's  Charles 
V,  and  is  suggestive  of  what  the  personal  and  na- 
tional equation  may  do  in  portraiture.  The  type 
is  Germanic,  the  lower  jaw  thin  and  protrusive, 
the  face  white.  The  colour  of  the  picture  has  a 
bleached  look  suggestive  of  cleaning  and  repainting. 

583.    Portrait    of    Sebastian    Miknster.      It    is     too 

woolly  in  texture  and  lacks  in  firmness  of  drawing, 
although  cleaning  and  restoring  may  be  responsible 
for  this.     The  colour  is  a  little  crude. 

60.  Angelico,  Fra.  Madonna  and  Child  Enthroned. 
A  large  picture  but  not  so  good  in  either  sentiment 
or  colour  as  the  smaller  No.  61.  It  is  evidently  an 
early  work — possibly  a  school  piece. 

61.    Saints  Dominic  and  Francis.      Very  pure  and 

lovely  in  the  sentiment  of  the  figures  and  very 
charming  in  the  meeting  of  the  colours  of  sky  and 
church  roof.  Notice  the  pretty  though  immaturely 
painted  landscape  at  the  left.  Notice  also  above 
it  the  kneeling  Madonna  with  her  blue  robe  against 


ANTONELLO  DA  MESSINA  9 

the  blue  sky — a  fine  study  in  painters'  values  for 
an  early  Renaissance  painter.  See  also  No.  62  as 
a  study  in  browns.  Both  panels  are  parts  of  a 
predella. 

60a.    The  Last  Judgment.     A   characteristic   ex- 

*  ample  of  Fra  Angelico.  The  heaven  at  the  left 
with  the  angels  and  flowers  is  the  best  part  of  it. 
Notice  the  ring  of  angels  dancing  below,  and  es- 
pecially the  angel  in  the  magenta  robe  with  a 
wreath  of  flowers  on  the  head.  Notice  also  the 
rising  lines  and  circles  of  angels  leading  toward 
the  top  of  the  panel.  All  the  robes  are  beautiful 
and  all  the  faces  very  pure  in  their  religious  senti- 
ment. The  hell  at  the  right-hand  corner  is  not 
good  in  colour  and  hurts  the  picture.  Possibly 
worked  upon  by  pupils  in  parts — the  hell,  fpr  in- 
stance. 

18.  Antonello  da  Messina.  Portrait  of  a  Young 
Man.  It  has  not  the  strength  of  the  Louvre  pic- 
ture (No.  1134)  nor  the  colour  of  the  National 
Gallery  portrait  (No.  1141),  but  is  a  very  true, 
honest,  and  frank  work  of  much  excellence.  The 
drawing  of  the  face  outline,  the  turn  of  the  eyes, 
the  painting  of  the  hair  are  in  Antonello's  usual 
manner  and  done  almost  perfectly.  See  the  per- 
haps better  example.  No.  18a.  This  picture  is  on 
wood  and  in  good  condition. 

18a.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Man.     Clear  in  drawing 

*  and  superb  in  dignity.  What  character  it  has! 
And  what  force!  Compare  the  drawing  of  the 
mouth  with  the  mouth  of  the  Botticelli  (No.  78)  in 
this  gallery.  Both  are  firmly  drawn.  The  colour 
is  simple,  but  how  could  it  be  more  appropriate, 
more  in  keeping  with  the  sitter? 


10  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

25.  Antonello  da  Messina,  School  of.  Portrait  of 
a  Young  Man,  It  is  rather  poorly  done,  especially 
in  the  hair,  the  eyes,  the  mouth,  the  face  outline. 
Antonello  might  possibly  have  done  it,  though  it 
is  more  likely  by  some  follower.  Even  the  colour 
lacks  in  quality. 
1640.  Backer,  Jacob  Adriaensz.  Portrait  of  an  Old 
Lady,  A  very  good  example  of  Backer,  a  pupil 
of  Rembrandt.  It  might  easily  pass  as  a  Rem- 
brandt with  the  uncritical.  It  has  not,  however, 
Rembrandt^s  firmness  of  drawing  nor  certainty  of 
touch,  but  is,  nevertheless,  a  fine  portrait.  It  is 
in  the  style  of  Rembrandt's  Elizabeth  Bas,  at  Am- 
sterdam, which  one  Rembrandt  authority  thinks 
should  be  given  to  Bol. 

603a.    Baldung  (Grien),  Hans.    Adoration  of  Kings, 

A  large  triptych,  rather  savage  in  its  bright  colour- 
ing and  not  quite  satisfactory  in  the  drawing  of 
hands  and  robes,  or  in  the  texture,  say,  of  the 
armour  in  the  wings.  It  is  done  with  sincerity 
but  not  with  the  skill  and  power  usually  shown  by 
Baldung. 

603.   Crucifixion,    This  is   better  than  No.  603a, 

but  still  is  somewhat  crude  though  honest  work. 
The  flesh  has  a  washed-out  look,  and  the  strength 
of  tragic  passion  that  goes  occasionally  with  this 
painter  is  not  so  apparent  here  as  in  No.  603b, 
hanging  near  by.  Notice  the  drawing  of  the  tree 
trunks  and  the  distant  height. 

249.    Bartolommeo,     Fra.      Ascension     of    Madonna. 

(An  altar-piece  in  the  chapel  down-stairs.)  Large 
and  rather  good  in  colour  but  meagre  in  the  types. 
The  drawing  is  not  of  the  best,  especially  in  the 
upper  figures,  which  do  not  speak  for  Fra  Barto- 


BELLINI,  GENTILE  11 

lommeo.  They  are  by  some  assistant.  Also  the 
aureole  back  of  the  Madonna  is  a  little  sweet  in 
colour.  The  robes  of  the  saints  are  well  done  and 
have  good  colour,  and  the  landscape  is  excellent 
in  its  sweep  and  serenity.  The  picture  looks  un- 
usually well  in  its  present  placing,  because  the 
chapel  gives  approximately  the  setting  for  which 
the  picture  was  originally  designed. 

1664.  Bartolommeo  Veneto.  Portrait  of  a  German. 
It  is  probably  the  work  of  a  German  showing  Vene- 
tian influence  of  the  Bellini  time.  The  landscape 
is  half-German,  and  the  type  of  the  sitter  is  Ger- 
manic. A  good  portrait,  somewhat  hurt  by  re- 
painting in  the  neck  and  elsewhere.  (Now  [1913] 
placed  under  the  Venetian  School.) 
37.  Basaiti,  Marco.  St,  Sebastian.  The  figure  is 
weak  in  drawing  and  affected  in  sentiment.  At  the 
back  is  a  river  scene  with  buildings  and  figures. 
The  picture  has  been  much  restored  but  was  never 
very  good.  It  is  by  a  pseudo-Basaiti  perhaps. 
4.  Basaiti,  Pseudo-.  Pieta.  Compare  the  head 
and  figures  of  the  Christ  and  John  here  with  the 
heads  and  figures  of  the  two  soldiers  at  the  bottom 
of  No.  1177a,  put  down  to  Bellini  (but  probably 
by  Basaiti),  for  resemblances  of  types  and  draw- 
ing. This  picture  was  formerly  attributed  to  Bel- 
lini but  is  probably  nearer  to  Basaiti  than  any  one 
else.  It  has  good  colour  and  strong  light-and- 
shade  about  the  head  of  the  Christ.  The  sky  is 
a  bit  blue.  Injured  by  restorations.  Many  ver- 
sions elsewhere. 

1180.  Bellini,  Gentile.  Madonna,  Child,  and  Donors. 
To  be  accepted  with  reservations.  It  is  in  Gen- 
tile's style,  but  too  much  injured  to  make  positive 


12  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

identification  possible.  The  woman  donor  at  the 
right  is  suggestive  of  Gentile,  but  this  is  not  con- 
clusive. 

10a.  Bellini,  Giovanni.  Madonna  and  Child.  Some- 
what heavy  and  wanting  in  inspiration.  The  fig- 
ures are  flat  from  over-cleaning — the  under  head- 
dress of  the  Madonna  having  almost  disappeared. 
The  contrast  of  the  red  and  blue  is  violent.  It  is 
possibly  a  school  piece. 

11.    Madonna  and  Child,     Long  of  neck  and  dull 

in  sentiment,  with  some  bad  drawing  in  the  hands 
and  no  very  profound  colour.  It  is  probably  a 
school  piece,  in  common  with  No.  10.  The  signa- 
ture means  merely  that  a  name  was  necessary  to 
carry  the  picture. 

28.    Dead    Christ    with    Angels.       The    subject    is 

somewhat  forbidding,  but  the  figure  is  very  lovely 
in  its  hard  drawing,  and  the  angels  are  pathetic  in 
their  grief.  An  oval  composition  in  a  square,  the 
heads  forming  the  top  of  the  oval,  and  the  arms  and 
hands  of  Christ  the  sides  and  bottom.  The  colour 
is  decidedly  fine  but  the  sentiment  of  it  is  finer.  It 
is  the  most  satisfactory  Bellini  in  this  gallery  but 
by  no  means  up  to  the  later  Pieta  at  the  Brera 
(No.  214).     Somewhat  repainted. 

1177.    Madonna  and  Child.     It  shows  the  influence 

of  Mantegna  in  the  Child  and  landscape  and  is 
perhaps  of  Bellini  workshop  origin.  Another  ver- 
sion in  the  Museo  Civico,  Verona. 

1177a.    The   Resurrection    of   Christ.     This    picture 

has  at  various  times  been  listed  as  a  Cima,  a  Basaiti, 
a  Bartolommeo  Veneziano,  and  now  as  a  Giovanni 
Bellini.     The  documentary  evidence  for  its  pres- 


♦ 


BELLINI,  JACOPO  13 

ent  attribution  is  of  some  value,  but  the  internal 
evidence  of  the  picture  is  contradictory  of  it.     Its 
tree  drawing,  rocks,  buildings,  and  general  land- 
scape effect  with  mountains  are  those  of  Basaiti. 
Compare  them  with  those  in  the  Basaiti  (No.  599), 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London,  and  No.  69,  of 
the  Venice  Academy.     They  are  all  the  same  in 
kind.     Also  compare  the  heads  and  types  with 
those  of  the  Basaiti  No.  4  and  the  Carpaccio  No. 
23a  (a  pseudo-Basaiti),  in  this  gallery.    They  are 
Basaiti  heads  and  types.    There  are  other  features 
pecuHar  to  Basaiti,  as,  for  instance,  the  white  spot 
made  by  the  warrior's  white  trousers  at  the  right, 
the  rocks,  the  dead  tree  and  the  bird,  the  dark 
hair  of  Christ,  the  white  flag  near  it.     The  sleeping 
soldiers  are  only  faintly  Bellinesque,  whereas  their 
position  under  a  rock  is  like  that  in  the  Basaiti 
(No.  69),  in  the  Venice  Academy  as  well  as  in  the 
Marconi  (No.  166)  (another  Basaiti),  in  the  same 
gallery.    The  work  is  too  coarse  for  Bellini.    No- 
tice this  in  the  heads  of  the  soldiers  or  the  women 
at  the  back.    The  picture  should  be  looked  at 
closely. 
12.    Bellini,  School  of  Giovanni.     Two  Venetians. 
This  is  by  the  painter  of  the  heads  in  the  Louvre 
(No.  1156),  put  down  there  to  Gentile  Bellini,  but 
t  in  reality  by  Cariani.    These  are  rather  weak  heads, 

I  and  the  workmanship  is  not  distinguished  in  any 

I  way.     Compare  them  for  resemblances  with  No. 

188  in  this  gallery,  by  Cariani. 

N.N.  Bellini,  Jacopo  (?).     Mourning  Over  the  Christ. 

Whether  it  be  by  Jacopo  Bellini  or  not,  it  is  in  the 
same  vein  and  spirit  as  the  Bastiani  (No.  1170a) 
hanging   near  it  and   may  serve  for  comparison 


14  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

with  it.  The  same  tragic  quality  with  harshness 
of  drawing  and  strength  of  colouring  is  apparent. 
They  are  by  no  means  of  identical  origin,  except 
perhaps  geographically.  A  work  of  some  force  and 
feeling  though  the  catalogue  queries  the  attribu- 
tion. 

60b.  Benozzo  Gozzoli.  Madonna  and  Child.  This 
gives  one  but  a  small  idea  of  Benozzo.  It  is  heavy 
in  the  drawing  of  the  figures,  harsh  in  the  Ma- 
donna's robe,  and  not  brilliant  in  either  gold  or 
colours. 

60c.    St,    Zenobius   Raising   a   Dead   Child,      The 

child  walking  forward  is  naive  in  treatment,  as  is 
indeed  the  whole  scene.  There  are  some  good 
heads  here  and  some  rather  brilliant  colours.  Part 
of  a  predella.     See  the  catalogue  note  upon  it. 

132.  Bertucci,  Giovanni  Battista.  Adoration  of 
Kings,  An  Umbrian  picture  of  much  interest  in 
the  expansive  landscape  at  back.  Notice  the  fine 
group  of  trees  at  right  and  the  distant  hills  through 
the  arch.     The  figures  are  slight. 

1182.    Bianchi,  Francesco.    Madonna  with  Four  Saints, 

It  shows  the  thin,  angular  types  and  liny  drapery 
with  the  white  medallion  of  the  Ferrarese,  and  yet 
there  is  some  doubt  if  the  picture  is  of  Ferrarese 
origin.  Good  in  colour  and  ornate  in  the  mosaics 
of  the  arch. 

43.  Bissolo,  Francesco.  Resurrection.  It  lacks  quality 
in  the  white  of  the  robe  of  the  Christ,  and  has  lit- 
tle character  in  the  types,  the  drawing,  or  the  han- 
dling.    How  soft  the  face  of  the  Christ! 

624.  Bles,  Herri  met  de.  Portrait  of  a  Young  Man, 
Apparently  the  only  reason  for  assigning  this  por- 


BONSIGNORI,  FRANCESCO  15 

trait  to  Bles  is  the  owl  on  the  tree  at  right.  Even 
the  catalogue  doubts  the  attribution.  If  this  is 
Bles  then  everything  else  in  every  other  gallery 
that  we  have  thought  was  Bles  is  wrongly  assigned. 
See  the  notes  on  Bles  in  the  Vienna  Gallery. 

1616.    Boccati,  Giovanni.      The  Three  Angels  and  Tohit, 

Never  mind  the  lax  drawing  or  the  faces;  but  look 
at  it  as  a  spot  of  colour  with  gold  as  an  added 
note.  It  is  really  fine.  The  attribution  is  largely 
a  guess,  but  you  need  not  mind  that  either. 

809a.    Bol,    Ferdinand.     Portrait   of  a    Young  Man. 

This  idealised  young  man  is  somehow  related  to 
the  angel  in  Rembrandt's  Jacob  Wrestling  with 
the  Angel  (No.  828)  on  the  opposite  wall.  The 
relation  is  more  than  superficial,  for  the  same  face 
appears  in  Bol's  Abraham  Receiving  the  Visit  of 
the  Angels  (No.  552),  in  Amsterdam.  The  cata- 
logue casts  doubt  upon  it,  but  it  is  a  true  enough 
though  rather  insipid  Bol.  See  the  note  on  the 
Rembrandt,  No.  828. 

207.    Boltrafiio,    Giovanni    Antonio.     St,  Barbara. 

Somewhat  exaggerated  in  the  figure,  heavy  in  the 
draperies,  and  crude  in  the  landscape  but  with 
good  feeling  and  good  colour. 

137a.    Bonfigli,  Benedetto.     Madonna  Enthroned,     A 

pretty  bit  of  gold  and  colour,  with  a  tall  Madonna 
and  small  angels.  Notice  the  blue  high  lights  on 
the  red  robe  of  the  angel  at  the  right. 

46c.  Bonsignori,  Francesco.  St,  Sebastian.  Stained 
and  much  changed  in  colour,  in  the  sky  as  well  as 
in  the  figure,  but  still  a  strong  piece  of  drawing. 
With  a  stern  and  rugged  mountain  landscape  at 
the  back  that  emphasises  the  rugged  conception 


16  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

and  drawing  of  St.  Sebastian.  It  is  effective  at  a 
distance.  Bonsignori's  best  pictures  are  at  Ve- 
rona. See  also  here,  No.  40,  with  the  catalogue 
note  upon  it. 
169.  Bordone,  Paris.  The  Chess-Play ers.  It  is  in- 
jured but  still  has  an  effective  landscape  and  fine 
architecture.  It  gives  one  small  idea  of  Bordone 
as  he  is  seen  in  the  Venice  Academy. 

191.    Madonna,  Child,  and  Four  Saints,     A   large 

*  picture  in  the  chapel  on  the  first  floor,  where  it 
shows  to  good  advantage,  placed  over  an  altar.  It 
is  a  bit  restless  in  drapery  and  somewhat  disturbed 
in  composition  by  the  sense  of  compression  from 
the  arch  on  top.  It  lacks  a  feeling  of  room  or 
space,  but  there  is  a  fine  figure  of  St.  Sebastian  and 
a  noble  Madonna  and  Child.  The  children  on  the 
step  are  also  very  good.  The  colour  is  rich,  varied, 
harmonious.     An  excellent  Bordone. 

51.  Borgognone,  II  (Ambrogio  Fossano).  Ma- 
donna and  Child,  A  very  charming,  if  somewhat 
sweet.  Madonna.  The  flesh  is  lead-coloured — 
more  so  than  is  usual  with  the  Milanese — and  the 
drapery  is  a  little  sharp  in  its  foldings  after  Bor- 
gognone's  usual  mannerism.  The  colour  is  good 
and  the  decorative  effect  is  enhanced  by  the  use  of 
gold  in  the  throne  and  on  the  floor.  The  Child  is 
a  little  wooden,  but  the  fat  putti  at  the  sides  are 
fine  in  green  and  gold  and  have  good  sentiment. 
An  early  example. 

62.    Madonna,  Child,  and  Two  Saints,     A  larger 

*  and  better  example  of  Borgognone  than  No.  51. 
The  flesh  is  less  sooty,  the  drapery  freer,  the  colour 
clearer.  With  handsome  robes,  flowers,  and  bal- 
dacchino.    The  suggestion  of  landscape  back  of  St. 


BOTTICELLI,  SANDRO  17 

John  is  fine,  and  the  little  angels  in  the  sky  are 
delightful. 

1647a.  Bosch,  Jerome.  St.  John  in  Patmos.  A  gen- 
uine enough  Bosch,  rather  good  in  the  figure  of  St. 
John  and  in  the  red  robe,  but  the  rest  of  the  picture 
is  a  little  crude.  It  gives  an  inadequate  idea  of 
Bosch  and,  besides,  has  been  hurt  by  retouching. 

78.    Botticelli,    Sandro.     Portrait   of  a    Young  Man. 

Sombre  in  colour,  but  what  character  it  has!  No- 
tice the  drawing  of  the  mouth  and  the  eyes.  It  is 
hard  but  very  effective.  The  attribution  is  ques- 
tioned, but  the  picture  is  not  far  from  Botticelli. 
It  was  formerly  attributed  to  Filippino  and  after- 
ward to  Raffaellino  del  Garbo. 

106a. Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman,     Lacking  in  col- 


our quality,  but  a  firm  face,  a  noble  Florentine 
type.  It  may  be  a  genuine  Botticelli,  though  it 
looks  a  little  like  a  copy.  Compare  it  with  No.  78, 
and  you  will  notice  its  poorer  quality. 

106b. Portrait  of  Ciuliano  de*  Medici.     It  has  been 

repainted  and  does  not  now  show  distinct  traces  of 
Botticelli's  work,  but  it  was  possibly  by  his  hand 
originally,  though  a  little  mechanical  in  drawing. 
It  now  looks  like  a  copy.  Another  version  in  the 
Bergamo  Gallery. 

106.    Madonna,    Child,   and    Two   Saints.     This    is 

probably  by  Botticelli's  own  hand,  but  it  seems 
done  in  a  perfunctory  manner.  It  lacks  inspiration 
and  fine  feeling.  For  the  sensitive  Botticelli,  it  is 
dull,  prosaic.  The  drapery  of  the  Madonna  is 
formal  and  liny,  the  flowers  in  the  vases  are  solid, 
the  architecture  is  given  without  much  feeling  for 
shadow  relief.    Even  the  arabesque  of  leaves  and 


The  whole  work  possibly  represents  the  painter  in 
a  tired  or  careless  mood.  The  foliage  over  the  St. 
John  at  the  left  is  about  the  only  spirited  part  of 
the  picture,  and  that  is  a  little  fussy  in  treatment. 
This  is  by  no  means  Botticelli  at  his  best. 

102.    Madonna,  Child,  and  Angels,     It  is   weaker, 

more  formal,  less  free  in  the  drawing  of  the  figures 
and  accessories  than  No.  106.  Compare  it  with 
that  picture — the  relief-work  pattern  on  the  two 
thrones,  the  flowers,  the  robes,  the  hands,  the  feet. 
The  difference  appears  slight,  and  this  picture  has 
all  the  earmarks  of  Botticelli,  whereby  the  Morelli 
followers  should  be  able  to  say  who  painted  it; 
but  it  has  not  the  Botticelli  quality.  Moreover, 
it  is  duller  and  deader  in  spirit  than  No.  106  or 
even  No.  102a,  which  is  saying  much.  The  cat- 
alogue suggests  that  it  was  done  with  the  help  of 
assistants. 

102a.    Madonna,  Child,  and  Singing  Angels,     Notice 

the  bad  drawing  of  the  right  eye  of  the  Madonna 
and  the  false  value  of  the  whole  side  of  her  face — 
something  that  may  have  come  from  poor  restora- 
tion in  the  cleaning  room.  But  notice  also  that 
her  hands  and  wrists  are  badly  drawn,  the  Child's 
legs  quite  unbelievable,  and  the  Child's  head  not 
on  his  body — things  that  are  chargeable  directly 
to  the  painter.  Again,  this  picture  has  the  Botti- 
celli crooked  forefinger,  the  square,  black-rimmed 
nail,  the  foot  with  the  long  second  toe  and  square 
nail;  also  it  has  the  types  and  pseudo-sentiment  of 
Botticelli,  but  it  lacks  his  style,  his  distinction,  his 
individuality,  his  quality.     It  is  tame,  prosaic,  dull 


robes  and  some  pretty  gold  work  in  the  borders. 
Probably  a  school  piece  by  the  same  hand  that 
did  No.  1289  in  the  Uffizi  at  Florence,  also  attrib- 
uted to  Botticelli. 

1124.   Venus.    There  is  some  indication  of  its  being 

a  study  for  the  Uffizi  Venus,  but  this  is  sHght  and 
leads  to  no  conclusion.  Th^  Venus  at  the  Uffizi  is 
not  up  to  the  Botticelli  standard,  technically,  and 
is  no  better,  perhaps  not  so  good,  in  drawing  as 
this  Berlin  example.  This  latter  seems  too  well 
done  for  a  varied  copy.  Notice  the  outlines  of  the 
arms,  legs,  waist,  the  curved  lines  of  the  jaw  and 
face.  The  hair  (touched  with  gold)  is  different 
from  the  Uffizi  picture  and  the  feet  seem  less  pulpy. 
A  very  good  picture  whether  a  study  or  a  copy. 
How  very  graceful  in  spite  of  its  apparent  awkward- 
ness! And  what  an  odd  conception  this  Christian 
Venus!    See  the  note  on  the  Uffizi  Venus  (No.  39). 

1128.   St.  Sebastian.    As  the  catalogue  points  out 

*  this  is  an  early  Botticelli  under  the  influence  of 
Antonio  PoUajuolo  and  Verrocchio,  and  a  very 
good  example  at  that.  It  is  worth  some  study  for 
its  fine  outline  drawing  alone.  The  figures  in  the 
background  are  sketchy  but  full  of  life.  And  the 
colour  of  it,  just  as  it  is — the  relation  of  the  figure 
to  the  background,  with  the  white  cloth  against 
the  grey-white  sky — is  excellent.  The  Venus  (No. 
1124)  might  be  tested  by  comparison  with  this 
fine  nude. 

81.    Botticelli,  School   of.     Portrait  of  a  Woman.     A 

bit  pretty,  but  not  wanting  in  charm  whether 
school  piece,  copy,  or  imitation. 


20  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

533.  Bouts,  Thierri  (or  Dirk).  Elijah  in  the  Wilder- 
**  ness.  The  colour  qualities  of  the  robes  are  superb, 
the  landscape  fine,  the  drawing  rather  minute  and 
precise.  Notice  the  second  Elijah  walking  up  the 
path  in  the  background  and  how  well  this  figure 
keeps  its  place  in  the  landscape.  Notice  also  the 
delightful  colour  of  the  angel's  wings.  And  be- 
hold the  blue  shadows  on  the  white  dress — some- 
thing the  modern  impressionists  would  have  us 
believe  they  discovered!  Part  of  an  altar-piece 
(with  539)  from  the  church  of  St.  Peter  at  Louvain. 
Other  parts  are  in  the  Munich  Gallery  (Nos.  110 
and  111).     An  excellent  panel. 

533a. Christ   in   the  House  of  Simon,     If  one  were 

*  in  a  captious  mood  he  might  find  fault  because  the 
table  and  the  floor  do  not  lie  down  flat  and  the 
still-life  on  the  table  is  not  effectively  distributed; 
but  the  figures  are  so  fine  in  feeling  and  the  col- 
our is  so  beautiful  that  minor  matters  appear  in- 
consequential. What  wonderful  heads  and  what 
wonderful  texture  painting!  A  copy,  probably  by 
Albert  Bouts,  is  in  the  Brussels  Gallery  (No.  626), 
which  see. 

533b.    Christ   on    the   Cross,     A  cold   landscape   is 

in  the  background.  The  figures  are  formal  but 
pathetic,  the  colour  not  so  fine  as  that  of  No.  533. 
It  is  some  sort  of  copy  after  a  painter  nearer  to 
Roger  van  der  Weyden  than  Bouts.  See  No.  543 
and  the  catalogue  note  upon  it. 

539.    Feast  of  the  Passover.     The  robes  are  a  har- 

*  mony  of  all  colours — red,  blue,  yellow,  green,  brown 
— held  together  by  keeping  them  in  the  same  key 
of  light.  The  drapery  is  angular,  the  room  well 
drawn,  the  light  at  left  through  the  door  excellent. 


BRONZING,  ANGELO  21 

These  panels  by  Bouts  have  no  large  simplicity  of 
form  in  a  Velasquez  sense  and  no  breadth  of  col- 
our in  a  Titian  sense;  but  in  feeling,  in  sentiment, 
in  refined  and  delicate  workmanship  they  are  al- 
most above  criticism.  Part  of  an  altar-piece  with 
No.  533,  but  not  so  well  done  as  the  parts  at 
Munich  (Nos.  110  and  111). 
545b.  Madonna  in  Adoration.  Evidently  a  frag- 
ment of  a  Birth  of  Christ  with  a  beautiful  little 
landscape  at  the  back.  The  Madonna  is  lovely  in 
colour;  but  is  it  the  Bouts  colour,  or  type?  There 
are  many  versions  of  this  Madonna  under  many 
names.  Some  master  hand,  perhaps,  created  it, 
and  many  followers  have  repeated  it. 

545c.   Madonna  and  Child.     It  is  rather  crude  for 

the  painter  of  No.  533  but  comes  somewhere  near 
him.  It  is  in  his  style,  but  coarser  in  the  hair  and 
flesh,  with  less  quality  in  the  colour,  and  less  in- 
vention in  the  landscape.  The  type  of  the  Ma- 
donna with  the  "bumpy"  forehead  appears  also 
in  the  Van  der  Weyden  (No.  549a)  and  the  Mem- 
ling  (No.  528b),  both  hanging  near  by.  The  type 
and  its  attribution  are  much  confused  in  the  Eu- 
ropean galleries.  There  are  many  versions  of  it 
under  many  names. 

597a.  Breu,  Georg.  Madonna  and  Child.  It  is  worth 
looking  at  for  its  figures  and  landscape.  These 
early  German  painters,  such  as  Breu,  Cranach, 
Altdorfer,  are  not  seen  elsewhere  in  the  galleries  of 
Europe  so  well  as  here,  at  Dresden,  and  at  Munich. 

338b.  Bronzino,  Angelo.  Portrait  of  Eleanor  of 
Toledo.  A  well-known  portrait,  sad  of  face,  smooth 
of  surface,  and  handsomely  done  in  the  dress  and 
the  pearls,  but  like  all  Bronzino's  work,  it  is  want- 


22  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

ing  in  the  decisive  touch  that  lends  distinction. 
There  are  other  versions  elsewhere. 
853a.    Brouwer,  Adriaen.     The  Toilet.    Look  at  it  for 
a  good  bit  of  free  painting  by  one  of  the  most 
masterful  of  all  the  Dutch  brushmen. 

853h.  Shepherd  on  Road,  A  broadly  painted  pic- 
ture of  much  excellence.  An  unusual  Brouwer 
with  some  poetry  in  the  silver-toned  landscape. 
The  figure  is  a  mere  colour  spot.  See  also  No.  853b 
and  853j  for  moonlight  effects. 

S21.    Bruyn,  BartheL    Portrait  of  a  Lady.    It  is  gay 

in  the  colour  of  under-vest  and  belt.  A  very  sin- 
cere work  and  no  doubt  an  exact  likeness  of  the 
lady,  but  it  is  not  inspired.  With  a  good  green 
ground. 

S20.    Portrait  of  a   Young  Man.     Companion  piece 

to  No.  S21  and  done  in  the  same  spirit.  Both  of 
them  painted  in  1534.  Bruyn  may  be  studied  to 
advantage  in  the  Cologne  Museum. 

588.    Portrait  of  John  van  Ryht.    The  colours  of  the 

robe  are  brilliant  and  attractive.  The  face  and 
beard  now  look  fumbled  as  though  much  gone  over 
in  the  cleaning  room.  The  hand  also  suggests 
cleaning-room  processes. 

283.  Bugiardini,  Giuliano.  Madonna  Adoring  Child 
with  Saints.  A  large  and  somewhat  heavy  group 
of  figures  loosely  put  together  and  indifferently 
drawn.  The  picture  is  not  an  inspiration  even 
though  the  pretty  little  angel  (without  legs)  de- 
scend from  the  heavens  above. 

569  1  Burgkmair,  Hans.      St.   Ulrich  and  St.  Barbara. 

572  /  Two  panels  with  single  figures  that  are  odd  and 
rather  awkward  but  very  good  in  colour.     Burgk- 


CARIANI,  GIOVANNI  BUSI  23 

mair's  best  pictures  are  in  the  galleries  at  Munich, 
Nuremberg,  and  Augsburg;  but  these  panels  have 
strength  in  the  drawing  and  colouring  and  are 
suggestive  of  power  even  in  the  landscapes.  See 
also  No.  584  for  its  good  landscape. 

414b.  Cano,  Alonzo.  St,  Agnes,  This  is  dry  in  the 
handling  and  rigid  in  the  drawing,  but  there  is 
character  about  it.  An  attractive  personality  in 
the  model  and  shown  with  good  colour.  Notice 
the  large  eyes  and  the  distance  they  are  apart, 
with  the  resultant  look  of  wonder. 

875a.  Cappelle,  Jan  van  der.  Sea  Piece,  A  painter 
about  whom  little  is  known  more  than  that  he 
painted  marines  fine  in  tone  and  light  and  with  a 
silvery  colouring.  This  is  not  the  best  example  of 
him  although  a  good  enough  picture  in  itself.  It 
is  a  little  hard  in  handling. 

185.  Cariani,  Giovanni  Busi.  Young  Woman  in 
Landscape.  Poor  Cariani  I  Any  picture  that  is 
too  bad  for  a  first  or  second  rate  Venetian  is  hung 
around  Cariani's  neck.  He  possibly  painted  this 
coarse  picture,  but,  if  so,  did  he  also  paint  the  re- 
fined, sensitive  St.  Sebastian  in  the  Vienna  Gallery 
(No.  63)  and  the  rather  lofty  Madonna  and  Child 
in  the  National  Gallery  at  London  (No.  2495)? 
What  a  versatile  soul  Cariani  must  have  been  ac- 
cording to  the  connoisseurs!  The  picture  was 
formerly  a  Giorgione,  then  a  Morto  da  Feltre,  and 
now  merely  a  Cariani !    It  has  been  much  repainted. 

188.  Portrait  of  a  Man,  This  portrait  is  more  sug- 
gestive of  the  Giorgione  (No.  12a)  in  the  next 
room  than  any  picture  in  the  gallery.  Notice  the 
hair,  the  eyes,  the  brows,  the  ledge  in  front  and 
the  right  hand  upon  it  for  a  few  obvious  resem- 


24  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

blances  to  No.  12a.  But  this,  while  now  much 
injured,  never  could  have  been  the  equal  of  the 
Giorgione  in  either  colour  or  spirit.  It  is  far  below 
it  though  later  work.  The  head  and  body  now 
do  not  hold  together  well.  Compare  this  portrait 
with  the  heads,  No.  12,  put  down  to  Giovanni 
Bellini's  School  but  probably  by  Cariani. 

14.    Carpaccio,  Vittore.     Madonna  and  Saints,     The 

Madonna  is  somewhat  heavy  in  the  jaw  and  none 
too  religious  in  feeling,  but  what  a  charming  Mag- 
dalen at  the  right  and  what  beautiful  robes  she 
wears!  With  a  true-enough  Carpaccio  landscape 
though  the  figures  are  not  very  characteristic  of 
the  master.  It  is  probably  a  school  piece  or  work- 
shop picture. 

23.    Consecration  of  St.  Stephen.     The  colouring 

*  is  fine,  the  robes  are  beautiful  in  hue  and  pattern, 
the  architecture  good,  the  landscape  full  of  inter- 
esting people,  horses,  houses,  trees.  The  very  pro- 
nounced sincerity  of  Carpaccio  always  lends  in- 
terest to  his  pictures.  Notice  the  frank  faces  of 
the  kneeling  figures  and  the  little  boy.  It  is  not 
the  best  Carpaccio  extant,  but  it  seems  the  best 
of  the  St.  Stephen  series  of  which  there  are  exam- 
ples in  the  Louvre  and  the  Brera. 

23a.   Burial  of  Christ.    This  picture  comes  nearer, 

perhaps,  to  being  an  imitation  of  Basaiti  than  a 
Carpaccio.  Compare  it  with  the  pseudo-Basaiti, 
No.  4,  and  also  the  Bellini,  No.  1177a  (really  a 
Basaiti),  for  resemblances  in  the  heads  of  Christ 
and  also  in  trees  and  landscapes.  Carpaccio  was 
chiefly  remarkable  for  the  character  of  his  men 
and  the  naive  quality  of  his  women  and  children, 
for  splendid  robes,  rich  colour,  and  magnificent 


CATENA,  VICENZO  25 

architecture.  WTiere  are  they  here?  And  where 
is  Carpaccio*s  charm  or  spirit  or  frank,  half-boyish 
point  of  view?  The  small  Carpaccio  likenesses  in 
this  picture  at  the  right,  in  the  background  figures 
and  horses,  are  rather  superficial.  The  picture  has 
little  of  his  peculiar  quality  about  it.  The  figure 
of  Christ  lies  flat  and  still,  and  as  spots  of  colour 
some  of  the  other  figures  are  interesting;  but  the 
composition  is  scattered  and  shows  too  many 
spotty  distractions  (peculiar  to  Basaiti)  for  the 
eye  to  be  well  pleased  with  it.  Compare  the  sky, 
rock  forms,  trees,  water,  figures  with  those  in  No. 
23  and  No.  14.  The  picture  is  falsely  signed  "  An- 
dreas Man  tinea*'  and  is  probably  by  an  imitator 
of  Basaiti  and  Carpaccio.  A  similar  picture  in 
style  and  method,  with  a  similar  signature,  is  in  the 
Metropolitan  Museum,  New  York,  under  the  name 
of  Carpaccio  (No.  C22). 

407.  Carreno  de  Miranda,  Don  Juan.  Portrait  of 
Charles  II  of  Spain.  It  is  in  Carreno*s  style,  with  a 
restless  background  and  over-done  accessories  that 
oppress  the  small  boy.  This  picture  was  probably 
elaborated  from  the  Madrid  portrait  (No.  642) — the 
elaboration  producing  the  dreadful  curtains  and  the 
eagles  above  the  picture-frames. 

47a.  Castagno,  Andrea.  Assumption  of  the  Ma^ 
donna.  The  red  of  it  is  startling,  and  a  little 
primitive,  perhaps,  but  attractive.  The  two  fig- 
ures at  the  side  stand  well  and  have  well-drawn 
robes,  and  the  brilliant  angels  with  the  variegated 
wings  and  garments  are  charming. 

S8.    Catena,    Vicenzo.     Portrait    of    Young    Woman, 

It  is  almost  a  study  in  whites,  to  which  result  vigor- 
ous processes  of  cleaning  have  no  doubt  contributed. 


26  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

The  bust  and  neck  are  very  flat,  with  their  model- 
ling lost,  but  the  gold  in  the  hair  and  the  gold  of 
the  robe  are  still  beautiful.  The  portrait  lacks  in 
force  but  has  some  charm.  Attributed  by  some 
critics  to  Jacopo  de'  Barbari. 

19.    Madonna,  Child,  and  Four  Saints.     Somewhat 

too  smooth  and  pretty,  with  a  want  of  quality  in 
the  colour  as  of  character  in  the  faces.  It  is  all  on 
the  surface,  like  powder  and  rouge,  with  no  sub- 
stance beneath  it.  It  is  a  genuine  Catena,  as  is 
also  the  portrait  No.  32,  but  both  pictures  are 
weak,  flat,  unprofitable. 

529a.  Christus,  Petrus.  Altar-Piece,  A  double  pic- 
*  ture  with  the  Birth  of  Christ  below  and  the  An- 
nunciation above.  They  must  be  regarded  as  two 
pictures  though  done  by  the  same  hand.  The 
drawing  and  handling  are  here  looser  than  with  the 
average  Van  Eyck  follower,  the  draperies  are  freer 
in  their  flow  and  fall,  the  colour  is  in  larger  masses, 
the  composition  simpler  and  more  restful.  It  re- 
minds one  of  the  Deposition  of  the  Brussels  Gallery 
(No.  139),  put  down  to  a  younger  Bouts,  and  there 
is  a  consensus  of  opinion  among  critics  that  the 
Brussels  Deposition  is  by  Christus,  but,  unfortu- 
nately, there  is  little  more  than  conjecture  about 
Christus  as  the  painter  of  either  picture.  He  is 
practically  an  unknown  quantity,  and  there  are 
few  attributions  to  him  that  may  not  be  questioned. 
The  colour  here  is  as  fine  in  depth  and  quality  as 
a  Bouts,  the  jewel  work  elaborate,  the  landscape 
excellent.  The  heads  are  odd  in  construction — 
notice  that  of  Joseph. 

529b.   Last  Judgment,    A  more  restless  and  uneasy 

composition  than  No.  529a  and  not  so  good  in 


CIMA,  GIOVANNI  BATTISTA  27 

colour.  The  angel  in  armour  is  beautiful  in  tex- 
ture painting.  There  is  a  good  study  of  the  sea  at 
the  back.  This  is  a  repetition  of  a  picture  in  the 
Hermitage  put  down  to  Jan  van  Eyck.  Both  the 
types  and  the  technique  associate  it  with  the  painter 
of  No.  529a.  It  is  a  companion  piece  to  that 
panel. 

532.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Girl.     It  looks  too  mature 

*  and  broad  in  method  for  a  painter  of  the  Christus 
date.  The  face  and  bust  have  been  rubbed,  and 
the  eyes  are  a  little  odd  in  their  drawing,  but  the 
picture  is  still  fine  in  colour  and  quaint  in  char- 
acterisation. Notice  the  push  back  of  the  wall 
from  the  head.  It  has  background,  air,  and  light. 
Decidedly  a  fine  portrait.  There  is  a  French  look 
about  it  that  keeps  asserting  itself. 

523b.    Madonna,  Child,  and  Donor,     A  very  pretty 

little  picture,  good  in  sentiment,  with  fine  figures 
in  richly  coloured  robes  and  a  delightful  townscape 
at  the  back.  Formerly  attributed  to  Jan  van  Eyck 
with  a  query.     See  the  catalogue  note  upon  it. 

529e  1  St,    John   Baptist   and  St,   Catherine,     The 

529f  J  wings  of  an  altar-piece  that  are,  perhaps,  nearer 
to  Geertgen  tot  Sint  Jans  than  to  Christus.  They 
are  large  in  their  conception  and  broad  in  the 
landscape. 

2.  Gima,  Giovanni  Battista.  Madonna  and  Child 
*  with  Four  Saints,  Somewhat  like  the  Cima  in  the 
Louvre  (No.  1209)  but  not  so  fine  in  colour.  A 
late  piece,  a  pyramidal  composition  with  a  beau- 
tiful throne,  architecture,  and  mosaic  work.  The 
shadows  of  the  flesh  are  a  little  sooty,  the  reds 
raspberry-hued,  the  draperies  papery;  but,  never- 


28  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

theless,  it  is  a  fine  Cima.     What  a  good  suggestion 
of  sky!    Hurt  by  cleaning  and  restoration. 

-Madonna,  Child,  and  Donor,     An  early  work. 


The  Madonna's  nose  and  eyebrows  are  a  little  hard 
but  her  head-dress  is  fine.  The  Child  is  the  centre 
of  light  and  interest,  but  the  donor  with  the  pray- 
ing hands  is  perhaps  the  best  bit  of  painting  in  the 
picture,  though  a  little  hurt.  The  landscape  and 
sky  are  excellent  as  are  also  the  colour  and  light. 

15.   Healing  of  Anianus,     With  beautiful  Venetian 

*  architecture  at  the  back  and  a  group  in  Oriental 
costumes  in  the  foreground.  Rich  in  early  Vene- 
tian colour.  Done  more  freely  than  is  usual  with 
Cima,  which  suggests  that  it  belongs  to  his  later 
time.    It  is  a  handsome  piece  of  work. 

17.    Madonna  and  Child.     The  best  part  of  this 

picture  is  the  landscape,  and  even  that  is  not  very 
good.  The  figures  have  been  damaged  by  restora- 
tions and  the  whole  picture  has  been  over-cleaned. 

985a.  Claez,  Pieter.  Still-Life.  An  attractive  still- 
life  to  those  who  like  the  microscopic  and  the  ultra- 
reaUstic.  You  could  pick  up  the  olive  on  the  dish, 
which  is  conclusive  evidence  of  high  art  to  some 
people.  The  picture  is  good  in  colour  and,  of 
course,  contains  much  skilful  work,  but  one  won- 
ders if  it  was  worth  while. 

448b.    Claude    Lorraine.     Italian    Coast   Scene.     Un- 

*  usually  warm  in  colour  for  Claude,  with  bright 
figures  in  the  foreground  and  a  sunset  sea  at  the 
back.  The  figures  are  said  to  have  been  done  by 
Filippo  Lauri.  One  seldom  sees  so  good  a  Claude. 
It  is  an  excellent  picture. 


CORNEILLE  DE  LYON  29 

578.  Cleve,  Juste  van  der  Beke  van  (Master  of  the 
Death    of  the  Virgin).     Adoration  of  Magi,     A 

triptych  with  saints  on  either  side.  The  saint  at  the 
right  is  naive  and  attractive.  The  central  figures 
are  rich  in  robes.  The  landscape  is  crowded  with 
small  details  suggestive  of  Herri  met  de  Bles, 
Patinir,  and  several  other  painters  of  their  time. 
The  work  is  said  to  be  early  and  is  not  the  master's 
best  effort. 

615.    Portrait  of  a   Young  Man.     Done  with  much 

colour  effect  which  does  not  detract  from  the  por- 
trait in  any  way.  It  is  well  drawn  and  forceful. 
Said  to  be  a  late  work  of  the  master. 

633b.  Cleve  the  Younger,  Juste  van.  Portrait  of  a 
Lady.  A  substantial  portrait  full  of  good  feeling 
if  not  wonderful  workmanship.  Once  attributed 
to  Holbein  and  now,  just  as  doubtfully,  to  Cleve 
the  Younger,  called  the  Fool,  about  whom  no  one 
has  much  knowledge.  See  also  No.  633a,  of  which 
Rubens  is  supposed  to  have  made  a  copy,  now  in 
the  Munich  Gallery  (No.  786). 

406b.  Coello,  Alonzo  Sanchez.  Portrait  of  Philip  II 
of  Spain.  Much  hurt  by  repainting  and  originally 
perhaps  too  glittering  in  the  costume,  but  a  fair 
enough  sample  of  Coello's  work.  He  was  a  pupil 
of  Moro. 
55.  Conti,  Bernardino  de*.  Portrait  of  a  Cardinal. 
It  has  a  cut-outHDf-wood  look  and  is  rather  crude 
in  workmanship,  though  no  doubt  a  likeness  and 
done  without  the  least  attempt  to  flatter.  It  is  a 
signed  work — something  rare  in  the  case  of  Ber- 
nardino's pictures. 
1643.  Corneille  de  Lyon.  Diana  of  Poitiers.  This  is 
a  perfect  little  portrait  after  the  style  usually  asso- 


* 


10  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

ciated  with  the  Clouets.    Look  at  it  closely  for  the 
beautiful  yet  sure  way  in  which  everything  about 
it  is  done.     Observe  the  little  note  of  colour  in  the 
bonnet.     Formerly  known  as  a  Clouet. 
607.    Cornelisz  van  Oostsanen  (or  Van  Amsterdam), 

*  Jacob.  Altar-Piece.  A  triptych  of  the  Madonna 
and  Child,  with  saints  and  donors  in  the  wings. 
Coarse  drawing  is  seen  in  the  Madonna's  hands, 
which  may  be  compared  with  the  Lucas  van  Ley  den, 
No.  574a.  The  background,  though  full  of  small 
details,  is  well  held  together.  Notice  the  donors 
with  their  fine  heads  and  the  saints  standing  above 
them  in  their  rich  robes.  It  bears  no  marked  re- 
semblance to  other  pictures  attributed  to  this 
painter.  The  landscape  and  the  Madonna  seem 
Netherlandish,  but  the  Child  and  the  little  angels 
are  of  Germanic  origin.  In  any  event,  the  work 
shows  good  colour  and  has  a  character  of  its  own. 

218.  Correggio,  Antonio  AUegri  da.  Leda  and  the 
Swan,  A  graceful  but  not  very  strong  perform- 
ance. The  figures  of  the  attendants  are  charm- 
ingly disposed  and  support  on  either  side  the  cen- 
tral figure  of  Leda.  The  faces  are  insipid  and  the 
colour  is  rather  frail,  but  it  is  not  just  to  hold  Cor- 
reggio  responsible  for  this.  The  picture  has  been 
very  badly  injured.  The  head  of  Leda  was  at  one 
time  cut  out  of  the  picture  and  afterward  replaced 
and  restored  by  Charles  Coypel.  Later  (1830)  a 
new  head  was  painted  and  inserted.  The  circle  of 
the  original  cut  can  still  be  seen  in  the  canvas. 
The  attendant  figures  have  also  been  repainted. 
See  the  catalogue  note  upon  it. 

115a.    Cossa,  Francesco  del.   Autumn,    A  large,  strong 

*  figure,  rather  coarsely  drawn  and  unusual  in  colour. 


CRANACH  THE  ELDER,  LUCAS       31 

There  Is,  apparently,  some  Paduan  influence  in  the 
sculpturesque  drapery  and  in  the  perspective,  as 
one  looks  down  upon  the  half-Mantegnesque  land- 
scape. The  figure  is  more  real  than  ideal,  even 
though  used  in  allegory.  Notice  the  realism  of  the 
grapes.  The  picture  is  much  repainted  but  still 
a  good  example  of  a  rare  man. 
Costa,  Lorenzo.  Christ  in  the  Temple.  Notice 
the  arch  of  figures  in  the  first  plane  and  its  repeti- 
tion in  the  figures  of  the  second  plane.  But  in 
spite  of  this  attempt  to  bring  the  figures  together 
the  characters  are  not  related  to  one  another. 
Each  one  stands  apart  and  poses  for  himself.  But 
the  picture  is  simple  and  restful  with  good  colour. 

Deposition.    Large  in  size  and  lacking  force 

because  of  the  scattered  composition.  The  figures 
do  not  hold  together  well,  though  there  is  an 
oval  or  circular  arrangement  to  them.  Somewhat 
stained  in  the  flesh-notes.  The  landscape  is  the 
best  part  of  the  picture  with  its  distance  of  sea 
and  mountains. 

Cranach  the  Elder,  Lucas.  Madonna  and 
Child.  A  type  somewhat  Teutonic  and  heavy  but 
full  of  sincerity.  The  children  are  very  charming 
in  their  infantile  quality.  But  Cranach  does  not 
improve  by  enlargement  of  the  panel. 
Apollo  and  Diana.  With  an  attractive  out- 
line drawing,  now  somewhat  hurt  by  repainting,  as 
in  the  Apollo,  for  instance.  Of  course,  it  is  the 
Germanic  classic  that  we  have  in  the  types.  And 
why  not?  The  deer  and  landscape  seem  unin- 
jured. 

Portrait  of  a   Young  Patrician.     It  is   simply 

and  easily  done.     Notice  the  doing  of  the  eyebrows. 


32  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

moustache,  mouth,  nose.  An  effective  portrait, 
surely. 

567.    Adam  and  Eve,     A  motive  often  employed  by 

Cranach  and  designed  to  show  his  picturesque 
outline  drawing.  This  example  shows  to  better 
advantage  than  No.  564,  because  in  better  condi- 
tion. Notice  the  fruit  and  foliage  and  the  strong 
colour  of  the  sky.  See  also  the  large  nudes,  Nos. 
594  and  1190. 

567a.  St.  Anne  and  the  Madonna,  These  are  at- 
tractive figures  in  their  types  and  robes.  A  won- 
derful green  curtain  is  back  of  them.  At  the  top 
are  charming  little  putti.  Notice  the  landscape 
at  the  side. 

564a.   Rest  in  Egypt.     A  very  beautiful  picture  in 

*  every  way.  The  Madonna,  children,  and  angels  all 
have  great  charm  and  sweetness  of  mood.  The 
colour  and  grouping  are  excellent,  the  landscape  is 
masterful.  Those  who  cannot  overlook  or  forget 
the  Germanic  types  in  a  sacred  subject  and  can  see 
nothing  admirable  in  these  figures  might  look  at 
the  landscape.  Shut  out  the  figures  with  your 
hand  or  your  hat  and  look  at  the  trees  in  their  re- 
lation to  the  distant  sky.  Where  did  you  ever  see 
in  art  a  more  beautiful  colour  harmony?  The  blue 
is  equal  to  Chinese  porcelain  in  quality.  Probably 
a  very  early  work  and  certainly  a  very  lovely  one. 

593.    The   Fountain   of   Youth,     This   picture   will 

please  because  of  its  amusing  subject,  but  it  is  not 
so  good  a  work  as  the  pictures  Nos.  564  and  567, 
for  instances.  It  is,  of  course,  not  in  the  same 
class  with  No.  564a.  It  was  probably  designed  by 
Granach  and  painted  by  pupils. 


CRIVELLI,  CARLO  33 

567b.    David  and  Bathsheba.     A  Germanic  way  of 

telling  the  familiar  story  with  the  nude  carefully 
omitted.  It  is  not  wanting  in  good  colour.  What 
naive  figures  I  And  how  well  related  to  their  back- 
ground ! 

589.  Cardinal  Alhrecht  of  Brandenburg.  The  col- 
our of  the  Cardinal's  robe  is  a  bit  high  in  key.  The 
landscape  is  good.  Better  as  a  portrait  than  No. 
559 — in  fact,  one  of  Cranach's  best. 

100.    Credi,  Lorenzo  di.     Madonna  Adoring  Child.     A 

fair  example  of  Lorenzo.  The  flesh,  as  usual,  is 
white  and  dough-like,  the  colour  cold,  the  back- 
ground hard  and  formal.  It  is  a  bit  trite  in  sen- 
timent. 

103.   St.  Mary  of  Egypt.     An   exceptionally  good 

*  Lorenzo.  The  figure  is  well  drawn,  and  the  angel 
coming  out  of  the  sky  is  excellent.  Much  better 
than  No.  100.  See  the  note  upon  it  in  the  cata- 
logue. 

Gristus.    See  Christus. 

156a.  Crivelli,  Carlo.  Madonna,  Child,  and  Seven 
Saints.  It  is  a  very  ornate  picture  with  much  jew- 
elling and  brilliancy  of  colour  in  the  robes,  fruits, 
architecture;  yet  with  all  its  fine  workmanship 
and  beautiful  colour,  the  picture  fails  in  producing 
a  pleasant  impression  as  a  whole.  Possibly  this  is 
due  to  the  confusion  of  patterns  in  the  brocades, 
the  mass  of  rich  things,  and  the  wealth  of  jewelling. 
The  picture  is  barbaric  in  its  richness.  Then,  too, 
the  angle  lines  formed  by  the  architecture,  the  staffs, 
and  the  drapery  are  uncomfortably  apparent.  And, 
again,  the  Madonna  seems  too  small  in  the  head. 
It  is  a  good  piece  of  work  but  over-crowded  with 


34  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

detail,  too  angular  in  its  lines,  and  a  little  out  of 
proportion  as  regards  its  figures.  Crivelli  is  a 
wonderful  painter  at  his  best.  His  decorative 
effects  are  as  fine  as  any  in  Italian  art. 

1156.   The  Magdalen,     Not  SO  rich  in  gold  or  patterns 

as  No.  1156a  and  simpler  in  effect,  filling  the  panel 
well.  The  gilded  stucco  reliefs,  the  robe,  the  flow- 
ers, the  marbles  are  excellent.  Notice  the  pale  roses 
at  the  top  and  then  the  bright  coral  beads  about 
the  neck.  It  is  not,  however,  a  superlative  exam- 
ple of  Crivelli. 
861.  Cuyp,  Aelbert.  Landscape,  A  yellow  sunlight 
effect,  very  easily,  even  sketchily,  painted  and  with 
good  colour.  Several  other  Cuyps  are  in  this  gal- 
lery, but,  saving  No.  861b  with  its  fine  luminous 
sky,  they  are  not  remarkable. 

1064.  Daddi,  Bernardo.  Coronation  of  the  Madonna, 
Notice  the  faces  of  the  saints  and  angels,  also  the 
kneeling  and  standing  angels  in  the  central  panel. 
They  are  very  pure  in  sentiment. 

1064a.    Madonna  and  Saints,     A  larger  piece  than 

No.  1064  but,  perhaps,  not  so  good  decoratively. 
This  may  be  due  to  some  restoration. 
527.  Daret,  Jacques.  Adoration  of  Kings,  The  one- 
time tendency  to  identify  Daret  as  the  Master  of 
Fl^malle  is  not  carried  out  in  the  attributions  here 
at  Berlin.  The  painters  are  regarded  as  distinct 
personalities.  The  l  Darets  seem  a  little  coarser, 
more  commonplace  in  workmanship  and  prosaic  in 
sentiment  than  No.  538c  by  the  Master  of  Flemalle. 
The  identity  of  the  Master  of  Flemalle  has  not  yet 
been  completely  established,  though  he  is  now 
generally  considered  one  and  the  same  person  as 
Robert  Campin. 


DOMENICO  VENEZIANO  36 

573.  David,  Gerard.  Crucifixion,  It  lacks  in  quality 
and  there  is  nothing  very  distinguished  about  its 
colour  or  its  drawing.  A  somewhat  perfunctory 
and  uninspired  panel.  The  kneeling  figure  is  the 
best  part  of  it,  although  the  group  at  the  right  is 
fairly  well  given.  The  background  has  the  look  of 
a  copy,  and  the  figures  rather  add  confirmation  to 
this. 

573a.    Madonna  and  Child,     It  is  explained  (in  the 

catalogue  and  elsewhere)  that  this  is  an  early  David, 
which  may  be  true.  It  is  certainly  not  a  character- 
istic one,  as  we  now  understand  this  painter.  The 
subject  is  about  all  that  relates  it  to  his  other  work. 
The  Holy  Family  at  the  right  is  picturesque. 

1614.  Domenico  Veneziano.  Portrait  of  a  Young 
*  Woman.  The  face,  neck,  and  figure  are  now  flat 
in  modelling — probably  the  direct  result  of  over- 
cleaning.  It  is  a  fine  profile,  a  noble  portrait.  The 
face  is  not  pretty  but  is  full  of  dignity  and  character 
— the  strong  Itahan  type  of  the  early  Renaissance, 
than  which  Europe  has  never  seen  anything  finer. 
The  attribution  is  not  satisfactory,  nor  is  Mr.  Beren- 
son's  tentative  assignment  to  Baldovinetti  wholly 
acceptable.  The  painter  of  it  was  near  to  the 
painter  of  the  Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman  in  the 
Poldi-Pezzoli  Collection  (No.  157),  Milan.  More- 
over, these  two  portraits  are  not  far  removed  from 
the  two  portraits  (Nos.  585  and  758)  in  the  National 
Gallery,  London,  but  the  resemblance  between  this 
Berlin  picture  and  the  one  at  Milan  is  the  stronger. 
They  should  be  compared  for  the  drawing  of  the 
nose,  mouth,  eye,  neck,  hair,  and  the  brocaded 
pattern.  Who  did  them  is  still  a  question.  The 
blue  background  has  been  repainted  and  now  fits 


36  KAISEE-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

too  closely  about  the  head,  neck,  and  figure.  It 
has  no  depth  nor  any  recession. 

847.  DOU,  Gerard.  Rembrandt's  Mother,  In  Dou's 
Rembrandtesque  style,  like  Nos.  257  and  258  at 
Cassel.  The  identification  of  the  sitter  as  Rem- 
brandt's mother  is  merely  a  flight  of  the  imagina- 
tion. We  know  nothing  whatever  about  her  per- 
sonal appearance. 

557d.    Diirer,     Albrecht.     Portrait    of    Jacob    MufFeL 

The  face  looks  as  though  it  had  met  with  some 
severe  repainting.  The  modelling  is  still  large  and 
powerful.  The  drawing  originally  was,  no  doubt, 
very  good.     Formerly  thought  to  be  a  copy. 

557e.    Portrait  of  Jerome  Holzschiirer.     The   fine- 

*  ness  of  lines  suggest  the  engraver.  It  is  a  remark- 
able piece  of  work,  although  it  has  not  much 
breadth.  Diirer  was  a  realist  of  detail,  and  is, 
perhaps,  more  famed  for  fineness  of  brush  stroke 
than  ensemble  or  breadth.  See  also  the  Portrait 
of  Frederick  the  Wise  by  Durer  (No.  557c).  They 
are  none  of  them  satisfactory  in  their  present  con- 
ditions. 

657f.    Madonna  of  the  Finch,     The  brown  shadows 

of  the  flesh  are  a  little  disturbing.  They  may  be 
due  to  some  dark  underbasing  working  through  to 
the  surface,  but  it  is  more  likely  that  they  are 
directly  due  to  bad  repainting.  The  colour  is 
somewhat  violent.  The  cherubim  at  the  top  are 
hurt.    The  landscape  at  the  right  is  very  good. 

557g.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman.     It  foreshadows 

*  Hans  Holbein  in  its  outline  drawing  and  is  worth  a 
score  of  Durer's  Madonnas  such  as  No.  557f.  It 
is  something  seen  in  the  life  rather  than  in  the 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  37 

imagination.  A  brown-skinned  young  woman  and 
different  from  Durer's  usual  portraiture.  Probably 
done  at  Venice,  with  some  Italian  influence  appar- 
ent in  it.  Notice  the  suggestive  background  and  the 
poetic  feeling  conveyed  by  it.  Hurt  by  repainting. 
The  chain  now  refuses  to  travel  about  the  neck, 
and  the  outline  is  a  little  hard.  The  painter's 
initials  are  worked  into  the  embroidery  of  the  neck 
yoke. 
770.  Dyck,  Anthony  van.  The  Mocking  of  Christ. 
*  A  good  Van  Dyck  in  the  manner  of  Rubens  but  a 
little  hot  in  the  flesh  of  the  chief  figure,  as  may  be 
noted  by  comparison  with  the  St.  Sebastian  of 
Rubens  next  to  it.  The  colour,  however,  is  unusu- 
ally clear  and  good  for  Van  Dyck,  and  the  drawing 
is  true.  The  light  is  dull  and  the  shadows  dark. 
Another  version  at  the  Prado,  Madrid  (No.  1474). 

778.   The  Dead  Christ.    The  figure  of  Christ  shows 

the  influence  of  Rubens  in  the  drawing  and  mod- 
elling. The  shadows  are  bl^k  from  underbasing 
and  the  flesh-notes  are  hectic.  The  colour  is  dusky 
and  uncertain  because  of  the  changes  it  has  under- 
gone. These  are  not  the  pictures  in  which  Van 
Dyck  succeeds.  In  his  religious  pictures  he  almost 
always  betrays  mental  and  technical  weaknesses. 
He  was  a  portrait-painter  above  all  else. 

782.    Portrait    of    Thomas    Frangois    di    Carignan, 

There  is  much  flourish  of  trumpets  and  display 
about  it,  but  the  results  are  rather  barren.  There 
is  too  much  pose,  too  much  lace  and  armour  and 
not  enough  of  the  straightforward  man. 

782a.    Nymphs   Surprised    by   Satyrs.     Well-drawn 

figures  with  good  action  and  life.  The  flesh-notes 
are  excellent.    The  work  is  not  unlike  Rubens  and 


38  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

was  probably  done  under  Rubens's  influence.     No- 
tice the  finely  modelled  back  of  the  seated  figure. 

782b.    Portrait  of  a  Noble  Genoese.     A  fine  portrait 

*  of  an  old  man  with  ruff  and  cuffs,  and  a  shrewd, 
judicial  look  in  his  eyes.  In  Van  Dyck's  so-called 
Genoese  period,  with  an  effective  robe  and  archi- 
tectural features.  The  face  and  hands  are  beau- 
tifully modelled,  and  the  figure  is  well  placed  on  the 
canvas.  Everything  about  it  is  quite  right  except 
the  surface,  which  is  smoother  than  usual.  That 
may  be  the  result  of  cleaning.  The  colour  is  dull 
in  grey-browns.  That  may  be  the  result  of  some 
repainting  or  of  Van  Dyck's  having  tried  to  pro- 
duce a  Titianesque  effect.  It  is  a  peculiar  example 
of  the  painter.  Where  does  one  see  its  like?  But 
a  fine  portrait. 

782c.    Portrait  of  a  Genoese  Lady.     This  is  the  com- 

*  panion  piece  to  No.  782b,  but  it  is  not  so  satis- 
factory as  the  former.  Both  are  excellent  so  far 
as  composition,  drawing,  character  are  concerned. 
Notice  the  manner  in  which  the  hair  and  eyes,  the 
forehead  and  chin  are  given.  The  whole  face  is 
beautifully  drawn.  The  hands  are  a  little  frail 
and  too  elegant — the  right  hand,  perhaps,  too 
much  cleaned.  Placed  on  the  canvas  to  match 
No.  782b.  As  regards  the  face,  it  is  apparently  in 
better  condition  than  its  companion  piece.  No. 
782b.  But  both  portraits  have  dull,  dark  colour, 
which  is  odd  for  Van  Dyck's  Genoese  period.  The 
two  pictures  are  perhaps  Van  Dyck's  tribute  to 
Titian,  in  which  he  helped  himself  to  that  master's 
blacks,  whites,  and  half-tones. 

787a.    Portrait  of  Marchesa  Geronima  Spinola.     A 

*  young  lady's  exclamation  over  this  portrait,  "  What 


ENGELBRECHTSEN,  CORNELIS  39 

a  pity  she  had  to  die!"  is  perhaps  sentimental  but 
nevertheless  expressive.  She  meant  to  say  the  lady 
was  too  beautiful  to  die.  But,  since-  she  had  to  die, 
how  fortunate  she  was  in  having  had  Van  Dyck 
to  paint  her  portrait  for  future  generations !  A  fine 
Van  Dyck  in  his  Genoese  period,  showing  him  in 
his  swaggering,  ornate  style,  with  not  too  niuch 
good  drawing  but  with  an  air  of  elegance  and  no- 
bility. What  grace  and  carriage  in  the  figure  with 
the  full-falling  skirt!  What  a  pose  of  head !  What 
a  glance!  How  she  moves  forward  and  up!  A 
splendid  type  of  dignity  and  womanhood.  Some- 
what repainted  in  the  face  and  cleaned  in  the  hands, 
which  have  darkened  from  black  underbasing. 
(Thiem  Collection.) 

799.  The  Two  St.  Johns.  It  is  empty  as  a  composi- 
tion, and  the  architecture  at  the  sides  does  not 
help  it  out  much.  The  head  of  the  Evangelist 
looking  up  is  very  fine,  with  a  beautifully  drawn 
face  and  well-painted  hair  suggestive  of  Van  Dyek's 
master,  Rubens.  The  Baptist  is  less  satisfactory. 
The  right  hand  is  rather  bad,  and  the  legs  are  not 
convincing.  In  Van  Dyek's  early  manner  while 
under  the  influence  of  Rubens. 

820.  Eeckhout,  Gerbrandt  van  den.  Christ  Pre" 
aented  in  the  Temple.  A  very  good  group  well 
painted  and  fine  in  colour  and  atmosphere.  In 
Eeckhout's  smoother  manner,  but  it  may,  never- 
theless, be  compared  with  No.  828 J,  put  down  to 
Rembrandt,  but  really  by  Eeckhout  in  a  freer  style 
of  brush-work. 

609.    Engelbrechtsen,  Cornelis.     Calling  of  Matthew. 

What  good  grouping  and  good  colour!  The  scene 
of  the  interior  with  its  green  table-cloth,  figures. 


*** 


40  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

Still-life,  light,  shadow  is  excellent,  though  the 
drawing  is  not  of  the  best.  What  colour  in  the 
green  and  red  robes,  the  architecture,  the  cushion! 
It  is  a  fine  picture,  though  few  people  stop  to  look 
at  it. 
512  1  Eyck,  Hubert  and  Jan  van.  Six  Wings  of  the 
523  /  Ghent  Altar-Piece.  Of  this  famous  altar-piece 
the  originals  of  the  three  central  panels  of  God, 
the  Madonna,  and  John,  with  the  Adoration  of  the 
Lamb  below,  are  in  Ghent;  the  Adam  and  Eve 
panels  are  in  Brussels.  The  rest  of  it,  including 
the  Playing  and  Singing  Angels,  the  Just  Judges, 
Christian  Soldiers  and  Pilgrims,  the  Annunciation, 
and  the  Donors,  is  here  in  Berlin.  Copies  by  Coxie 
of  the  central  panels  are  in  place  here  in  the  Ber- 
lin Gallery,  so  that  a  good  idea  of  the  effect  of  the 
whole  work  is  obtainable. 

Enough  and  to  spare  has  been  written  about  this 
celebrated  altar-piece.  There  are  many  disputes 
about  the  authorship,  and  more  than  twenty  differ- 
ent surmises  have  been  made  as  to  which  brother 
painted  this  or  that  portion.  The  inscription  on 
the  wing  at  the  left  reads,  in  substance,  that 
Hubert  van  Eyck  "began"  it  and  Jan  "finished'* 
it.  Which  did  which?  Without  entering  deeply 
into  the  merits  of  the  question,  it  may  be  pointed 
out  to  the  most  casual  observer  that  two  hands 
have  been  at  work  here.  Ignoring  the  Coxie  copies 
of  the  central  panels  we  take  first  the  Singing  and 
playing  Angels,  and  the  two  side  pieces  of  the 
Christian  Soldiers  and  Just  Judges.  The  garments 
and  draperies  and  brocades  here  fall  full  and  free, 
without  much  crinkling  or  sharp  angle  lines.  The 
painting  seems  broader,  fuller,  and  comparatively 
freer  than  in  the  panels  with  the  Donors  or  the 


EYCK,  HUBERT  AND  JAN  VAN      41 

Annunciation,  though  this  and  the  colour  cannot 
be  argued  from  with  confidence,  since  the  whole 
altar-piece  has  been  restored  a  number  of  times. 
In  the  centre  panel  of  the  Adoration  (Coxie's  copy) 
there  is  some  crinkling  in  the  drapery  of  the  kneel- 
ing figures  in  front,  but  this  is  by  no  means  so 
marked  as  in  the  white  figures  in  the  wings  or  in 
the  Madonna  and  the  Annunciation  angel.  It  is 
more  like  the  crinkling  and  angularity  which  the 
Donors  have  in  their  garments. 

Consider  the  wing  with  the  Donors.  Notice  the 
difference  between  the  draperies  of  the  Donors  and 
those  of  the  figures  in  white — St.  John  the  Evan- 
gelist and  St.  John  Baptist.  The  latter  are  sharply 
folded,  the  hands  and  fingers  squarer,  the  hair  in 
pronounced  ringlets  to  give  a  sculpturesque  effect. 
The  shadows  also  are  not  so  dark  back  of  the  white 
figures  as  back  of  the  Donors.  Consider  next  the 
Madonna  on  the  opposite  wing.  The  flesh  is  much 
paler  (which  may  be  the  restorer's  hand)  than  in 
the  Donors  or  the  Singing  and  Playing  Angels,  the 
white  drapery  is  abrupt  in  angle  lines  as  in  the  two 
Johns,  the  drawing  is  again  sharper  than  in  the 
Singing  Angels  or  the  Judges  or  Riders.  Moreover, 
the  type,  as  well  as  that  of  the  angel  Gabriel,  is 
different  from  the  Singing  Angels.  And  is  not  the 
sentiment  or  feeling  of  this  Angel  and  Madonna 
more  intense  or,  at  any  rate,  different  from  that  of 
the  Singing  Angels? 

It  may  be  fairly  inferred,  and  it  is  probable  at 
least,  that  the  inscription  is  true,  and  that  two 
men  worked  at  the  altar-piece — the  two  brothers. 
Again,  which  did  which?  If  Hubert  "began"  it,  is 
it  to  be  supposed  that  he  began  on  the  outside  wings 
first?    In  a  Rubens-workshop  sense,  to  "begin" 


KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

was  to  sketch  in  or  outline  or  base;  to  "finish" 
was  to  put  the  final  surface  touches  upon  it.  But 
Hubert  could  not  have  "finished"  in  that  sense, 
because  he  died  years  before  the  altar-piece  was 
completed.  It  is  likely  that  he  "began"  with  the 
central  panel  of  the  Father,  Madonna,  and  John, 
with  the  Adoration,  that  he  did  the  Just  Judges, 
the  Soldiers,  the  Singing  and  Playing  Angels,  and 
possibly  the  Donors.  These  being  the  freer  and 
broader  portions  of  the  altar-piece,  it  has  been  in- 
ferred that  Hubert  was  the  broader  and  freer 
painter  of  the  two — the  better  painter.  But  how 
could  that  be  when  Hubert  was  the  earlier  and  older 
painter,  and  there  being  every  reason  to  suppose 
that  Jan,  coming  twenty  years  after  and  a  pupil 
of  Hubert,  would  have  developed  a  more  mature 
and  freer  technique  than  his  brother?  The  problem 
is  difficult  of  solution,  and  this  is  not  the  place  to 
attempt  it  by  arbitrary  assignment  of  the  different 
parts  to  Hubert  or  Jan.  It  is  sufficient  to  recog- 
nise two  hands  in  the  altar-piece,  one  drawing  more 
freely  than  the  other.  Which  was  Hubert  and 
which  Jan  is  not  likely  to  be  known  with  any  cer- 
tainty. 

Let  us  now  look  at  the  altar-piece  a  moment 
merely  as  a  series  of  pictures,  regardless  of  its  origin 
or  of  its  painters.  All  the  panels  have  been  re- 
stored and  retouched. 

The  Just  Judges.    With  portraits  of  Hubert 

van  Eyck  (the  rider  in  blue  robes  in  front)  and  Jan 
van  Eyck  (in  black,  turning  to  look  to  the  left). 
All  the  riders  are  contemporary  portraits  of  dis- 
tinguished people.  (See  the  Revue  Arch^ologique, 
November,  1910.)  How  magnificently  they  are 
clothed  and  how  superbly  they  ridel    What  won- 


EYCK,  HUBERT  AND  JAN  VAN  43 

derful  horses  and  what  a  background  landscape! 
This  is  the  Flemish  ideal  or  point  of  view,  but 
compare  this  group  of  horsemen  with  the  Italian 
ideal  of  Benozzo  Gozzoli,  in  the  Riccardi  Palace  in 
Florence,  where  the  Medici  are  riding  in  the  Adora- 
tion of  the  Magi,  and  it  will  not  suffer.  A  wonder- 
ful piece  of  early  Flemish  painting,  than  which 
nothing  finer  has  been  produced. 

513.  The  Christian  Soldiers.  These  are  the  advance- 
guard  of  the  Just  Judges  and  are  a  part  of  the  pro- 
cession. They  are  quite  as  magnificent  in  horses, 
costumes,  and  strong  characterisation  as  the  Just 
Judges.  Notice  the  landscape  at  the  back  of  these 
two  panels.  They  are  perfect  in  their  way.  There 
can  be  no  carping  or  cavilling  over  such  work  as 
this.  The  only  thing  the  critic  can  do  is  to  hold 
his  tongue  and  rejoice  that  some  art  is  beyond  him. 

514.  The  Singing  Angels,  Here  again  is  the  Flem- 
ish ideal,  but  with  what  sincerity  and  honesty  it  is 
realised!  Did  the  religious  feeling  of  Filippino  or 
Botticelli  ever  go  beyond  it?  Notice  the  splen- 
dour of  the  brocades,  the  bordering  bands,  the 
jewels.  And  what  wonderful  exactness  and  pre- 
cision without  losing  strength  of  characterisation 
or  truth  of  ensemble! 

515.  The  Playing  Angels.  More  angels,  more  bro- 
cades and  jewels,  more  beauty  of  colour  and  deli- 
cacy of  workmanship.  Notice  the  beautiful  robe 
of  the  seated  angel  in  the  foreground.  And,  again, 
how  well  this  minute  work  holds  together!  It  does 
not  prevent  a  large  simplicity  of  forms. 

516 1  The    Hermits    and    the    Pilgrims.     With    fine 

517  J  heads  and  free-falling  robes  and  a  forest  of  trees 
with    fruit.     What    serious-looking    faces!    What 


44  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

naturalistic  forms  and  movements!  What  moving, 
animated  throngs!  The  large  figure  is  the  giant 
St.  Christopher. 

519  1  Portrait  of  Jodocus  Vydt  and  Wife.     Homely 

522  J  but  honest  folk,  painted  with  a  sincerity  that  can 

never  be  too  much  praised.  What  exquisitely 
drawn  heads  and  hands!  The  drapery  is  a  little 
restless  at  the  bottom,  but  that  is  a  small  matter. 
The  flesh  colour  is  reddish,  possibly  from  retouch- 
ing. The  woman  seems  the  better  in  colour  as 
in  forceful  characterisation.  It  is  difficult  to  say 
whether  the  painter  of  the  broad  drapery  (sup- 
posed to  be  Hubert)  or  the  painter  of  the  angular 
drapery  (supposed  to  be  Jan)  did  these  Donors. 

520.    The  Angel  of  the  Annunciation.     The  type  is 

less  robust  and  more  pathetic  than  in  the  Singing 
and  Playing  Angels.  It  is  a  different  type.  The 
flesh  colour  of  the  hands  and  face  is  paler,  the  hair 
lighter  and  more  tender  in  the  painting,  the  drap- 
ery more  angular.  A  very  beautiful  angel.  The 
panels  between  the  Angel  and  the  Madonna  are 
copies — the  originals  being  at  Brussels.  This 
Angel  panel  is  supposed  to  have  been  painted  by 
Jan. 

521.    The    Madonna    of    the    Annunciation.     The 

hands  are  very  frail  and  small  as  compared  with 
the  Singing  and  Playing  Angels.  The  flesh  colour 
is  like  that  of  the  Annunciation  Angel.  The  robe 
is  sharply  folded  in  wrinkles.  The  type  and  senti- 
ment are  different  from  those  of  the  Singing  and 
Playing  Angels.     Supposed  to  be  by  Jan. 

518  1 The   Two  Johns.     They  are  in  grisaille,  rep- 

523  J  resented  as  statuary,   and  are  between  the  two 


EYCK,  JAN  VAN  45 

Donors.  They  are  the  least-interesting  portion  of 
the  altar-piece.     They  are  supposed  to  be  by  Jan. 

523a.    Eyck,  Jan  van.     Portrait  of  Giovanni  Arnolfini. 

*  This  is  a  supreme  effort  in  characterisation  and 
also  in  colour.  It  is  excellent.  Notice  the  hands. 
Cleaned  a  little  too  much,  perhaps,  but  still  very 
fine.  There  are  people  wjbo  doubt  its  authenticity. 
One  wonders  why. 

525a.  Man  with  a  Pink,  It  is  very  exact,  minia- 
ture-like work.  The  wonder  is  that  this  exactness 
did  not  result  in  something  trivial  like  the  work  of 
Dou  or  Mieris.  Notice  the  hands  and  the  pink 
and  also  the  fur  hat.  The  face  is  less  interesting. 
Are  these  the  Jan  van  Eyck  hands?  Compare 
them  with  the  Madonna  and  Angel  in  the  altar- 
piece,  Nos.  520-521.  The  picture  has  been  shaken 
somewhat  by  modern  criticism  and  is  now  vaguely 
said  to  be  a  good  replica  of  a  lost  original. 

525c.    Madonna    and    Child   in    Church,      A    gopd 

picture  in  colour  and  in  the  church  background. 
The  drapery  of  the  Madonna  falls  freer  than  in  the 
large  altar-piece  in  the  next  room,  and  the  drawing 
is  less  rigorous.  It  is  another  version  of  the  pic- 
ture in  the  Antwerp  Gallery  (No.  255)  and  not  an 
entirely  convincing  Van  Eyck. 

525f.   Christ  on  the  Cross.     It  may  be  questioned 

if  it  is  by  either  of  the  Van  Eycks.  The  drawing 
is  hardly  of  Van  Eyck  accuracy,  and  the  sentiment 
is  excessive.  It  is  probably  school  work,  and  pos- 
sibly by  the  same  hand  that  did  the  two  altar- 
wings  at  the  Hermitage  (No.  44).  A  landscape 
with  snow  mountains  at  the  back.  Somewhat 
injured. 


♦ 


46  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

525g.    Portrait  of  a  Knight  of  the  Golden   Fleece. 

*  A  raaniature-like  performance,  beautiful  in  detail 
and  not  wanting  in  carrying  force.  The  hands  and 
the  dress  with  its  patterns  do  not  look  like  the 
work  of  the  Van  Eycks,  but  the  picture  is  quite 
worthy  of  them  or  of  any  other  early  Flemish 
painter.  Fine  in  colour  and  beautiful  in  the  draw- 
ing of  the  face,  the  pattern  of  the  coat. 

1175.  Ferrarese  School.  An  Espousal,  This  picture 
has  the  true  spirit  of  art  if  not  the  power  of  effec- 
tive technique.  The  drawing  is  all  bad,  the  land- 
scape is  crude,  the  painting  immature,  but  what  an 
indescribable  feeling  for  dignity  of  presence  and 
beauty  of  colour!  With  all  its  faults,  an  attractive 
picture.  Attribution  decidedly  uncertain.  It  might 
be  Paduan  or  Veronese  work. 

1147.    Ferrari,  Defendente.     Adoration  of  the  Child, 

Notice  the  odd  putti  with  coloured  wings  and  the 
excellent  Donor  at  the  right.  The  picture  has  good 
quality.  An  early  example  of  the  painter  and  with 
some  morbidity  or  excess  of  sentiment.  The  archi- 
tecture suggests  in  its  arches  that  the  picture  should 
have  a  rounded,  not  a  square,  top. 

380b.  Feti,  Domenico.  Elijah  in  the  Wilderness, 
Not  without  some  sure  and  free  painting  in  the 
angeVs  wings.  Good  also  in  colour.  See  a  similar 
subject  in  the  Madrid  Gallery  (No.  629)  by  Alonzo 
Cano. 

129.  Fiorenzo  di  Lorenzo.  Madonna  and  Child,  A 
bright  piece  of  gilding  and  colouring  that  makes 
everything  near  it  look  dull  and  tame.  Such  an 
old  master  is  just  as  killing  among  its  neighbours 
in  a  gallery  as  a  Claude  Monet  among  modern 
landscapes  of  the  Corot  type. 


FRANCIA,  FRANCESCO  47 

Flemish  School.     See  Netherland  School. 

813b.  Flinck,  Govert.  Susanna.  A  finely  illuminated 
back,  better  in  lighting  than  in  drawing,  but  a 
beautiful  piece  of  modelling,  nevertheless.  There 
is  much  artistic  feeling  about  it.  At  The  Hague 
(No.  707)  they  put  down  this  sort  of  thing  to  Rem- 
brandt with  no  questions  about  it.  Here  at  Berlin 
they  ascribe  it  to  Flinck  with  a  query. 

47.  Fogolino,  Marcello.  Madonna  Enthroned  with 
Saints.  A  large  altar-piece  with  a  balanced  com- 
position, fine  robes,  and  good  architecture.  The 
Madonna  in  her  niche  is  queenly  if  not  pietistic. 
An  excellent  landscape.  The  picture  shows  some 
North  Italian  influence,  possibly  coming  from 
Vicenza,  or  even  Brescia. 

133.  Foppa,  Vincenzo.  Pieta.  The  flesh-notes  are 
stained  and  brown,  possibly  as  the  result  of  old 
restoration.  It  is  hurt  but  still  possesses  a  charm 
of  colour.  Notice  the  bright  reds  and  oranges. 
The  hands  and  feet  are  badly  drawn  and  much 
repainted. 

.617.  Foucquet,  Jean.  Etienne  Chevalier  and  St, 
Stephen.  These  are  fine,  strong  faces  and  figures, 
not  unlike  Holbeins  in  some  respects.  They  are 
now  somewhat  injured.  Notice  the  St.  Stephen 
at  the  right  with  his  thin,  spiritual  face.  The  left 
half  of  a  diptych;  the  other  part  is  in  the  Antwerp 
Gallery  (No.  132). 

Francesco  di  Stefano.    See  Pesellino. 

122.  Francia,  Francesco.  Madonna  and  Child  in 
Glory.  A  large  but  not  very  satisfactory  picture. 
The  figures  are  too  hot  in  colour  and  the  landscape 
is  too  cold.     There  is  no  marked  unity  between  the 


48  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

figures  and  the  landscape,  but  an  attempt  is  made 
to  unite  the  upper  and  lower  groups  by  the  lines 
of  St.  Catherine's  wheel  which  are  repeated  in  the 
Madonna's  aureole.  The  draperies  of  the  two  cen- 
tral figures  seem  damaged  by  restoration. 

287.    Francia,  Giacomo.   Madonna  as  Queen  of  Heaven. 

It  is  in  the  improvised  chapel  down-stairs.  A 
large  picture  and  important,  but  cold  in  the  blues 
and  unhappy  in  the  attitude  of  the  figures  below. 
They  stand  badly.  Nor  does  the  Madonna  above 
stand  any  better.     Afine  landscape  at  back. 

245a.  Franciabigio  (Francesco  Bigi).  Portrait  of 
Young  Man,  The  portrait  is  red  in  the  eyelids 
and  lips,  mannered  in  the  hands,  and  rather  attrac- 
tive in  the  Andrea  del  Sarto  landscape  with  its 
blue-green  sky.  It  is  a  portrait  with  some  indi- 
viduality about  it  and  some  nervous,  sensitive  qual- 
ity. Sir  Claude  Phillips  gives  reasons  for  thinking 
it  by  II  Rosso  in  the  Burlington  Magazine  for 
December,  1911. 

1079.  Gaddi,  Taddeo.  Madonna  and  Child,  It  still 
has  fine  decorative  quality  about  it  in  its  gilding, 
its  tooling,  and  its  colouring.    See  also  No.  1081. 

90.  Garbo,  Raffaelino  del.  Madonna,  Child,  and 
Two  Angels.  A  little  uneasy  in  the  draperies,  the 
trees,  the  landscape,  but  interesting  in  sentiment. 
The  parapet  at  the  back  breaks  across  the  circle 
abruptly.  A  characteristic  and  graceful  work  of 
the  master,  showing  the  influence  of  Filippino. 

98.    Madonna    and    Child    Enthroned    with    Two 

*  Saints,  This  seems  to  be  the  most  important  pic- 
ture given  to  Raffaelino  in  this  gallery.  It  is  a 
very  good  work,  restful  in  colour  and  drawing  and 


GEERTGEN  TOT  SINT  JANS  49 

good  in  sentiment.  Notice  the  angels  with  lilies 
at  the  back  for  sentiment  that  is,  perhaps,  a  little 
strained.  The  carpet  on  the  steps  is  irritating  in 
its  newness  and  bright  colouring.  A  handsome 
frame  with  small  pictures  in  the  panels  probably 
by  a  later  hand. 

SI.      Madonna,   Child,  and  Two    Angels,     It  has 

Filippino's  sentiment  somewhat  drawn  out  and 
attenuated.  A  little  frail  in  the  form  of  the  Ma- 
donna (who  does  not  stand  well),  in  the  angels,  in 
the  cushion  on  the  bench,  in  the  architecture. 
Injured  by  repainting  in  parts. 

243.    Garofalo    (Benvenuto   Tisi).    St,  Jerome,    An 

excellent  example  of  Garofalo.  Here  the  painter 
is  at  his  best,  especially  in  the  landscape,  which 
has  some  distinction  and  individuality  about  it. 
The  robes  of  the  saint  lend  a  bright  key-note  of 
colour. 
213.  Gaudenzio  Ferrari.  Annunciation,  A  beauti- 
ful picture,  unique  in  its  reds  and  greens  and 
charming  in  the  types.  The  angel  and  the  lilies 
are  lovely.  And  what  beautiful  golden  hair!  Well 
drawn  and  free  in  its  handling  for  the  man  and 
the  time. 
1631.  Geertgen  tot  Sint  Jans  (Gerard  of  Haarlem). 
John  the  Baptist,  The  drawing  is  sharp  and  the 
landscape  somewhat  mannered,  especially  in  the 
foliage,  but  the  total  effect  of  the  figure  belonging 
in  and  to  the  landscape  is  very  good.  It  has  not 
the  breadth  of  the  Louvre  picture  (No.  2563a)  nor 
its  colour.  And  the  forlorn  attitude  of  the  Bap- 
tist with  his  hard  little  lamb  beside  him  is  not  in- 
spiring. It  is  the  same  figure,  however,  that  ap- 
pears in  Geertgen's  work  elsewhere. 


* 


50  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

806d.  Gelder,  Aert  de.  Family  Scene,  Very  ani- 
mated and  sketchy  handling  but  without  good 
drawing  in  it  or  under  it.  It  is  ineffective  facility. 
Notice  how  badly  constructed  are  the  heads  and 
hands.     The  colour  is  fine. 

21.  Ghirlandajo,  Domenico.  Judith.  There  is  some 
good  movement  in  the  figure  at  the  left,  but  Judith 
herself  is  posing  too  much.  The  relief  on  the  wall 
and  the  pilasters  are  very  good.  Not  strongly  rep- 
resentative of  Ghirlandajo.  It  is  probably  a  school 
piece.  It  was  once  attributed  to  Mantegna — an 
impossible  assignment. 

12a.  Giorgione  (Giorgio  Barbarelli).  Portrait  of  a 
**  Young  Man,  A  fine  type  of  mid-Renaissance  por- 
traiture. It  has  the  frankness  and  nobility  of  char- 
acter seen  in  the  early  men  with  some  of  the  tech- 
nical excellence  shown  in  the  later  men.  A  serene, 
well-poised  mind,  a  refined  and  sensitive  nature,  a 
clean-cut,  intellectual  face  are  here  shown.  How 
calmly  the  eyes  look  out  at  us  without  an  insolent 
stare  but  rather  with  a  gentle,  inquiring  look! 
Surely  an  attractive  personality.  But  is  it  by 
Giorgione?  What  other  picture  of  his  shows  so 
much  of  the  sensitive  and  the  intellectual  as  this? 
Is  it  a  picture  of  Giorgione's  date  or  just  before  his 
time?  Has  it  not  something  of  the  sharpness  and 
flatness  of  the  early  Renaissance  in  the  outlines  of 
the  face,  the  drawing  of  the  eyelids,  the  hardness 
of  the  hair,  the  comparative  slightness  of  the  shad- 
ows, the  thinness  of  the  colouring?  Is  the  hand 
on  the  ledge  like  the  one  in  the  Shepherd  with  a 
Pipe  at  Hampton  Court,  or  is  it  a  little  hard  and 
cramped  like  Giorgione's  less  learned  contempo- 
raries, say  Catena?    And  what  about  the  dress, 


GIROLAMO  DAI  LIBRI  51 

with  its  colours  changed  somewhat,  its  square 
checks  in  the  sleeve  at  left,  the  angle  lines  and 
sharp  breaks  at  the  right.  Is  this  early  Renais- 
sance drawing  anywhere  apparent  in  Giorgione's 
other  work?  The  earliest  Giorgiones,  like  the 
Castelfranco  Madonna,  are  more  mature.  The 
same  kind  of  a  quilted  sleeve  appears  in  the  early 
Titian  Ariosto  (No.  1944)  in  the  National  Gallery, 
London,  but  again  how  vastly  more  mature  it  is 
than  this!  There  seems  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  cen- 
tury's difference  between  them.  This  Giorgione 
portrait  has  the  look,  the  eye,  the  hair  (faded  on  the 
ends,  as  in  the  Budapest  Giorgione),  the  outline  of 
a  very  early  Sebastiano  del  Piombo,  but  probably 
it  is  by  some  earlier  Venetian  whose  name  even 
we  have  not  heard.  Gallery  directors  are  often 
bothered  by  there  not  being  enough  familiar  names 
in  art  to  go  around — to  fit  such  unique  examples. 
But  let  us  not  overlook  the  art  in  questioning  the 
attribution.  This  portrait  is  a  superb  expression 
of  rather  early  Venetian  painting — quite  good 
enough  for  Giorgione  and,  in  spite  of  one's  doubts, 
possibly  by  him.  It  certainly  is  Giorgionesque. 
This  Berlin  portrait  with  the  Giorgione  at  Buda- 
pest, the  repainted  and  questionable  La  Schiavona 
of  the  Crespi  Collection,  and  the  so-called  Ariosto 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London,  all  seem  to  have 
something  in  common.  Is  it  a  common  hand  or 
a  school  likeness? 
1074a.  Giotto  di  Bondone.  Crucifixion,  It  is  not 
large  enough  in  structure  or  drawing  for  Giotto. 
It  is  probably  a  school  piece.  The  colour  is  attrac- 
tive. 
30.  Girolamo  dai  Libri.  Madonna  and  Child  En- 
*     throned  with  Saints.   There  is  here  a  decided  show- 


52  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

ing  of  Veronese  methods  in  composition  and  colour, 
as  witness  the  Madonna,  the  throne,  and  the  hand- 
some playing  angels  below.  The  picture  is  rich 
in  deep,  dark  notes  of  colour. 
26.  Girolamo  da  Santa  Croce.  St.  Sebastian.  Hard 
in  line,  almost  airless,  and  thin  in  colour.  With  a 
yellow-streaked  sky — an  oft-repeated  effect  of  this 
painter. 
1622a.  Goes,  Hugo  van  der.  Adoration  of  Shepherds. 
It  is  reminiscent  of  the  larger  and  more  important 
Van  der  Goes  in  the  Uffizi  at  Florence  but  by 
no  means  so  attractive.  The  shepherds  are  here 
placed  at  the  left.  The  composition  is  somewhat 
huddled,  the  drawing  exact  but  forceful,  the  colour 
strangely  beautiful.  Notice  the  hands.  And  the 
brocades  left  and  right.  The  form  and  size  of  the 
panel  suggest  that  it  was  originally  part  of  a  pre- 
della. 

551a.  Gossart,  Jan  (Mabuse).  Christ  on  Mount  of 
*  Olives.  A  moonlight  effect  very  interesting  for  its 
study  of  night  shadows  and  colours.  The  picture 
is  strong  in  its  pathos,  its  weirdness,  its  mystery  of 
shadows.  The  drapery  uneasy  and  the  drawing 
hard  but  the  colour  is  good.  Notice  the  light  on 
the  angel's  robe  in  the  sky.  Attribution  question- 
able.    It  may  be  nearer  to  Bouts  than  Gossart. 

648.    Neptune   and  Amphitrite.     A   good   piece   of 

drawing,  showing  Gossart's  attempt  at  the  Italian 
type,  which  suggests  his  having  seen  work  of 
Michelangelo,  of  Jacopo  de'  Barbari,  of  Diirer. 
The  figures  are  lumpy,  large  of  hand  and  foot,  nar- 
row in  the  eyes.  Northern  flesh  and  flabbiness  are 
still  apparent  in  them.  With  severe  Greek  archi- 
tecture at  the  back. 


HALS,  FRANS  53 

650.    Madonna  and  Child.     In  Gossart's   slippery, 

smooth  style  of  work.  It  is  restless — almost  as 
much  so  as  the  portrait  No.  586a,  which  is  wholly 
lacking  in  repose.  No.  656a,  assigned  to  Hemessen, 
is  also  probably  by  Gossart. 

865e.    Goyen,  Jan  van.     View  of  Nimeguen,    A  fine 

*       diagonal  composition  with  a  white-clouded  sky  and 

excellent  colour.     It  has  a  big  lift  about  the  sky. 

Interesting  also  for  the  buildings  of  the  time.     One 

of  the  best  Van  Goyens. 

501 E.    Guardi,    Francesco.     The    Giudecca.    Of    the 

three  pictures  here  put  down  to  Guardi,  this  is, 
perhaps,  the  most  beautiful  in  colour  if  the  most 
spotty  in  the  small  high  lights.  See  also  Nos.  501 F 
and  501 G.     None  of  Qiem  is  a  superlative  Guardi. 

766.  Hals,  Frans.  Portrait  of  a  Man,  A  very  posi- 
tive piece  of  work,  delightful  in  its  free  handling  of 
the  brush,  which  gives  such  a  sense  of  power  in  the 
painter.  Notice  the  fine  forehead,  the  eyes,  cheeks, 
and  mouth.  It  is  thoroughly  well  done  in  every 
way  though  little  more  than  a  miniature. 

[  800.   Portrait  of  a  Man,     It  is  a  questionable  Hals 

and  is  not  a  very  interesting  portrait  in  either  type 
or  treatment.  Even  the  hat,  which  is  usually  so 
attractively  done  in  a  Hals  portrait,  is  here  balloon- 
pointed  and  disturbing.  The  white  collar  is  high- 
keyed,  but  well  done,  and  the  head,  hair,  and  hands 
are  accurate  but  nothing  more.  No.  801,  a  com- 
panion piece,  is  in  the  same  style.  They  are  both 
school  or  shop  works. 

801a.    Singing  Boy,     A  rather  attractive  boy,  but 

the  picture  is  to  be  accepted  with  reservations. 


54  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

The  feather,  hair,  and  coat  are  cheaply  done — such 
work  as  a  pupil-copyist  might  do  or  an  imitator 
such  as  Judith  Leyster. 

801c. Hille  Bobbe.     In  the  late  manner  of  Hals 

and  very  free,  even  sketchy,  in  its  handling.  It 
looks  as  though  it  might  have  been  done  at  a  single 
sitting.  Examine  it  closely  for  the  easy  breadth 
of  the  brush  strokes,  and  then  move  back  from  the 
picture  and  notice  the  certainty  of  almost  every 
stroke,  and  the  large  truths  of  form  it  reveals. 
His  hand  at  this  time  is  still  energetic  and  has 
nervous  power,  though  now  growing  careless  and 
at  times  ineffective.  The  slashes  of  paint  in  the 
sleeves  revealing  the  high  lights,  as  also  on  the  ruff, 
the  cap,  the  tankard,  the  owl,  are  not  so  absolute 
in  their  certainty  as  in  his  earlier  work.  What  a 
revelation  of  a  type  I  What  bulk,  body,  and  weight 
are  here!    What  spirit  and  life! 

801 G.    Nurse  and  Child,     A  very  human  piece  of 

*  portraiture.  The  unconscious  little  smile  of  the 
child,  the  equally  naive  and  well-pleased  smile  of 
the  nurse  (or  mother?)  tell  their  own  story.  A 
little  precise  in  drawing,  perhaps,  but  not  finical  or 
fussy.  Notice  the  sureness  of  the  touch  in  the 
ruffs  and  head-dresses,  the  child's  brocade,  the 
hands,  the  faces.  It  has  no  great  breadth  of  han- 
dling. How  well  the  two  figures  are  placed  on 
the  canvas  without  sacrificing  one  to  the  other! 
And  yet,  with  all  its  excellences,  it  may  be  school 
or  pupils'  work  and  not  by  Hals.  It  seems  to 
agree  with  the  style  of  work  in  the  Van  Beresteyn 
portraits  in  the  Louvre,  the  Laughing  Cavalier 
in  the  Wallace  Collection — pictures  perhaps  not  by 
Hals. 


HOBBEMA,  MEINDERT  55 

80  1h.    Portrait  of    Tyman   Oosdorp^     There  is  not 

too  much  life  in  this  portrait.  The  work  is  a  Uttle 
heavy.  Hals  did  it  carelessly  or  feebly,  for  it  is  a 
late  portrait.  The  painter  was  an  old  man  with  a 
hand  at  this  time  that  would  not  always  obey  his 
brain.  The  mouth,  nose,  and  right  eye  are  out  of 
drawing,  but  the  hands  are  suggested  only,  the 
white  below  the  collar  is  inconclusive,  the  flesh  is 
greyish,  the  shadows  brownish,  the  hair  is  swept  in 
with  a  broad  brush  and  rather  effectively.  A  fine 
sense  of  tone  and  the  figure  well  set  in  are  its  nota- 
ble excellences. 

801r.  Portrait  of  a  Haarlem  Patrician.  A  very  in- 
teresting portrait,  lively  in  its  feeling  and  very 
sure  in  its  handling  and  drawing.  It  seems  some- 
how to  suggest  Dirk  Hals  more  than  his  brother 
Frans,  but  in  either  event  it  is  well  done.  Compare 
it  with  the  small  portrait  No.  766,  which  seems 
more  in  the  style  of  Frans  Hals.  There  is  a  differ- 
ence between  them. 

825.    Heerschop,  Hendrick.     King  from  the  East,    An 

intelligent  and  spirited  piece  of  painting  if  not  very 
accurate  in  drawing.  In  the  Wallace  Collection 
(No.  238)  similar  work  is  given  to  Rembrandt. 

825a.  Heist,  Bartholomeus  van  der.  Portrait  of  a 
Young  Woman,  Somewhat  too  peach4ike  in  the 
flesh  and  a  little  exaggerated  in  the  jewellery. 
Not  Van  der  Heist's  best  effort.  See  also  the  note 
on  No.  413a  in  this  gallery — the  Admiral  Borro 
formerly  assigned  to  Velasquez. 

886.  Hobbema,  Meindert.  Landscape,  This  exam- 
ple of  Hobbema  is  no  improvement  on  Ruisdael 
and  lacks  Hobbema's  brighter  colour  and  light. 


56  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

Compare  the  drawing  of  the  tree  trunks  and 
branches  with  the  Van  de  Velde  (No.  922c). 

586.    Holbein  the  Younger,  Hans.    Portrait  of  Georg 

Cisze,  An  ineffective  portrait  because  of  its  scat- 
tered composition  and  its  superabundance  of  small 
objects  placed  here  and  there  with  wearisome  for- 
mahty.  Each  detail  is  well  enough  done,  as  notice, 
for  example,  the  vase  and  flowers;  but  the  details 
do  not  hold  together  or  help  toward  a  united  end — 
the  revelation  of  the  man.  Compare  this  work  with 
The  Two  Ambassadors  (No.  1314)  in  the  National 
Gallery,  London,  which  is  still  more  wearisome  in 
its  green  ground,  its  planted  figures,  and  the  minutise 
of  rubbish  that  grow  up  about  them.  It  may  be 
doubted  if  Holbein  did  either  work — heresy  though 
it  be  to  say  so.  The  Kratzer  portrait  in  the  Louvre 
(No.  2713)  is  of  a  piece  with  them. 

586b.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Man.     This  portrait  is 

similar  in  style  and  quality  to  Nos.  586c  and  586d, 
and  none  of  them  are  more  than  mediocre  perform- 
ances. This  No.  586b  is  smooth,  flat,  rather  hard, 
thin  and  crude  in  colour.  No.  586c  seems  a  little 
firmer  in  the  drawing  and  more  suave  in  method, 
but  the  change  is  slight.  They  are  possibly  school 
pieces  or  school  copies. 

586d.   Portrait  of  a  Man,     Said  to  be  in  Holbein's 

late  English  manner,  when  he  grew  somewhat  hot 
in  his  flesh-notes.  It  is  well  enough  drawn  in  the 
eyes  and  brows  and  has  minute  engraver-like  lines 
in  the  beard,  but  is,  all  told,  too  smooth  and  lacks 
Holbein's  force.  There  is  an  absence  of  quality 
characteristic  of  the  copy.  Look  at  the  flatness  of 
the  figure,  the  thinness  of  the  blacks,  reds,  and 
blues. 


ISENBRANT,  ADRIAEN  67 

820b.  Hooch,  Pieter  de.  The  Mother.  A  picture  in 
*  De  Hooch's  best  style.  The  light  coming  in  at 
the  back  is  warm,  penetrating,  delightful.  The 
painting  of  light  finally  became  a  mannerism  with 
the  painter,  but  not  more  so  than  with  Corot. 
One  does  not  tire  of  the  light  of  either  painter. 
The  drawing  and  handling  are  simple  and  direct, 
and  the  colour  is  excellent.  Notice  the  feeling  of 
depth  and  space  behind  the  bed  curtains,  and  for 
texture  painting  look  at  the  warming-pan  on  the 
wall  and  the  still-life  on  the  table.  A  fine  De 
Hooch. 

1401a.   Dutch  Interior,    It  is  not  De  Hooch  at  his 

best.  It  is  easily,  even  sketchily,  done  but  not  too 
effective  in  light,  drawing,  or  colour.  Attribution 
doubtful. 

1401b.   The  Gold  Weigher.    A  picture  rather  warm 

in  colour  from  its  wall  background,  though  not 
so  brilliant  in  light  as  is  usual  with  De  Hooch.  The 
head  does  not  join  the  figure  well,  and  the  latter, 
though  large,  is  sack-like.  But  it  is  well  painted, 
with  good  textures,  some  air  and  feeling  for  space, 
some  effect  of  broken  light.  Attribution  question- 
able.   Some  one  of  the  school  may  have  done  it. 

554.   Isenbrant,  Adriaen.     Madonna  and  Child.    It 

is  probably  by  some  follower  of  Gerard  David,  but 
it  is  worth  insisting  upon  once  more  that  Isenbrant 
is  only  a  name.  We  know  only  that  the  man  was 
a  David  follower,  but  have  not  a  single  authentic 
example  of  his  work  to  judge  by.  David,  Isen- 
brant, and  Patinir  are  the  names  tacked  on  various 
versions  of  this  Madonna  and  Child,  seen  in  various 
European  galleries. 


58  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

S12.  Italian  School  (Upper).  Portrait  of  a  Young 
Man,  A  rather  strong  head,  given  with  some  em- 
phatic hardness  in  the  face  and  the  red  coat,  but 
done  with  honesty  and  candour.  It  is  a  Httle  like 
an  Antonello  da  Messina.     (Simon  Collection.) 

S13. Madonna  and  Child.     It  has  good  sentiment 

and  feeling  though  somewhat  coarse  in  line  and 
muddy  in  colour.  See  the  catalogue  note  for  pos- 
sible influences  and  origin.  It  was  probably  done 
by  an  early  eclectic  who  helped  himself  to  the  work 
of  painters  at  Florence  and  at  the  north.  (Simon 
Collection.) 

750b  ]  Keyset,  Thomas  de.  Father  and  Son  and 
750c  J  Mother  and  Daughter.  These  portraits  at  one 
*  time  probably  formed  the  wings  of  an  altar-piece. 
They  are  good  pieces  of  portraiture  and  excellent 
in  both  colour  and  brush-work.  The  fine  heads  in 
No.  750b  are  almost  worthy  of  Rembrandt.  What 
types  they  are,  what  dignity  and  force  they  pos- 
sess! When  and  where  did  De  Keyser  ever  better 
them?  Notice  the  fine  painting  of  heads  and 
gowns  and  also  the  fine  sense  of  colour. 

750.    -Family  Group.     A  formal  family  group,  done 

simply  and  awkwardly,  with  no  attempt  at  cunning 
or  finesse  in  the  composition.  The  heads  are  all 
well  done.  And  notice  the  hands,  how  individual 
they  are.  They  might  have  been  painted  by  Van 
der  Heist,  so  excellent  are  they.  The  catalogue 
gives  the  picture  to  De  Keyser  with  a  query. 

821a.  Koninck,  Philips.  Landscape.  A  huge  expanse 
of  country  under  a  clouded  sky,  with  long  horizontal 
lines  cutting  across  the  canvas.  A  restful  compo- 
sition, though  not  perhaps  a  first-class  Koninck. 


LEYDEN,  LUCAS  VAN  59 

596a.    Kulmbach,  Hans  von.     Adoration  of  the  Magi. 

*  How  very  well  the  figures  are  arranged  in  this  pic- 
ture! There  is  no  crowding  or  huddling,  but  a 
very  true  and  naturalistic  grouping.  And  there  is 
great  sincerity  of  feeling  about  it.  Look  at  the 
peasant  type  of  the  Madonna.  She  is  really  pa- 
thetic in  her  dumb,  uncomprehending  look.  The 
drawing  is  good  and  the  colour  excellent.  The 
landscape  perhaps  a  little  too  cold.  A  fine  picture 
and  very  well  handled  for  the  time  of  its  painting. 

90b.    Leonardo    da    Vinci.     Resurrection    of    Christ. 

The  attribution  to  Leonardo  has  not  been  generally 
accepted.  We  have  heard  much  of  Leonardo's  love 
of  contours,  his  flowing  lines  of  drapery,  his  delicate 
blending  of  light  and  shade,  his  masterful  drawing; 
but  where  are  they  apparent  in  this  work?  Notice 
the  bad  foreshortening  in  the  figure  of  Christ,  the 
laboured  flight  of  the  figure,  the  harsh  angle  lines 
of  the  draperies  in  the  kneeling  saints  at  the  right 
and  left.  Compare  these  contours  and  draperies 
with  so  weak  a  Leonardo  follower  as,  say,  Melzi 
(No.  222  in  this  gallery),  and  even  in  this  inferior 
pupil  you  will  notice  greater  freedom  and  grace. 
The  much-discussed  Leonardo  wax  bust  in  the  next 
room  has  more  rounded  and  perfect  contours  than 
appear  in  this  picture.  Besides,  the  tomb  is  badly 
drawn,  the  hands  are  hard,  especially  in  the  knuckles, 
and  the  landscape  is  too  crudely  blue-green.  The 
picture  is  interesting  but  not  great.  It  undoubtedly 
belongs  to  Leonardo's  School.  It  has  been  some- 
what injured. 

574a.  Leyden,  Lucas  van.  The  Chess  Players.  Coarse 
in  the  types  and  harsh  in  the  drawing  (notice  the 
hands),  but  it  has  some  power.     What  massive 


* 


60  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

heads  and  bodies !  An  early  work,  perhaps,  though 
not  very  much  Uke  the  work  of  Lucas  van  Leyden. 

584b.    Madonna  and  Child.     Odd  in  its  vagaries  of 

colour,  as,  for  example,  in  the  leaf -like  wings  of  the 
small  angels.  The  colour  is  not  only  unique  but 
very  attractive.  The  Madonna  and  Child  are  a 
little  heavy  in  type,  but  are  given  with  pathos  and 
feeling.  The  arabesque  at  the  back  is  very  good, 
and  the  total  effect  brilliant,  high-keyed  in  light 
and  colour.  It  is  firmly  drawn  and  easily  painted. 
A  beautiful  picture.  There  is  a  suggestion  of  in- 
fluence from  Diirer  about  it. 

584a.   St,  Jerome.     In  the  painter's  usual  vein  of 

colour,  which  is  very  unusual  compared  with  other 
painters.  What  a  lovely  harmony  that  of  St. 
Jerome  and  his  heliotrope  robe  I  An  effective  little 
picture. 

46a.  Liberate  da  Verona.  St.  Sebastian.  An  im- 
portant example  of  Liberale  though  very  rigid  and 
wooden-like.  The  drapery,  leaves,  grass  are  metal- 
lic, the  columns  are  like  bronze.  But  the  hard 
drawing  has  a  certain  strength.  The  background 
figures  above  and  below  are  pleasing  spots  of  col- 
our, and  there  is  a  glimpse  of  light  through  the 
arch. 

78a.  Lippi,  Filippino.  Allegory  of  Music.  Small 
and  rather  coarse  in  the  drawing  of  the  chief  figure. 
The  cupids  and  swans  are  no  better.  The  trees  at 
left  and  the  sea  are  the  best  part  of  the  picture.  It 
has  a  hint  of  Raffaelino  del  Garbo  in  it. 

82.   Madonna  and  Child.     A  lovely,  ill-drawn  Ma- 

*  donna  with  a  sad,  inquiring  look,  and  quite  in  the 
Filippino  vein  of  sentiment  and  colour.    The  flowers 


LIPPI,  FRA  FILIPPO  61 

and  landscape  at  the  left  are  very  attractive — per- 
haps the  best  feature  of  the  picture — though  a  little 
too  high  in  key  for  the  figures.  The  picture  also 
suggests  BotticeUi  but  is  smoother  in  drawing, 
softer  in  outline,  and  with  rounder  contours.  Mr. 
Berenson  gives  it  to  Amico  di  Sandro,  which  is  to 
say  that  it  belongs  to  the  painter  who  did  No.  1412 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London,  and  No.  52  at 
Budapest.  The  flowers,  draperies,  landscapes  are 
all  of  a  piece  in  these  pictures,  and  they  were  almost 
certainly  done  by  the  one  hand.  That  hand  was 
not  Filippino^s. 

96.   Christ  on  the  Cross.    The  figures  are  touching 

in  sentiment  but  pallid  in  colour  and  rendered  in- 
effective by  the  high  key  of  the  gold  ground.  The 
angels  are  attractive  and  have  a  fijie  swing  about 
them.     Somewhat  injured. 

96a.   Portrait  Head.    Done  in  fresco  on  plaster 

and  now  put  in  a  frame.  Interesting  for  the  method 
and  the  medium  which  can  here  be  studied  close  at 
hand. 

101.    Madonna  and  Child.     Rather  attractive  if  a 

little  superficial  in  sentiment.  It  seems  done  in  a 
mechanical  manner  and  is  very  uneasy  in  the  drap- 
eries. 

58.    Lippi,    Fra    FilippO.     Madonna    and   Child.     It 

still  has  good  sentiment  and  colour,  though  hurt  by 
repainting. 

69.    Madonna   Adoring    Child.      A    very    fine   Fra 

**  Filippo  both  in  feeling  and  as  decoration.  The  in- 
fluence of  Fra  Angelico  shows  in  the  Madonna  type, 
in  the  colouring,  in  the  lovely  flowers  in  the  fore- 
ground.   The  heavy  type  of  the  Child,  peculiar  to 


62  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

this  painter,  is  repeated  in  the  St.  John.  The 
drapery  is  a  Uttle  regular  in  its  foldings  under  the 
Madonna's  knees.  The  landscape  shows  the  prob- 
lem of  lighting  (under  the  shadow  of  trees)  in  proc- 
ess of  development.  There  is  also  here  (before 
Leonardo's  time)  some  knowledge  of  the  stratifica- 
tion of  rocks.  And  notice  the  dark  brook  at  the 
right.  The  picture  represents  the  Trinity  as  well 
as  the  Madonna  Adoring  the  Child.  A  very  pure 
picture  not  only  in  sentiment  but  in  technique. 

95.    Madonna   as  Mother  of  Mercy.     There  is  the 

same  feeling  here  as  in  No.  69,  but  it  is,  perhaps, 
less  intense,  less  pure.  The  Madonna's  red  robe 
is  beautiful  in  colour.  Some  of  the  work  in  this 
picture  may  have  been  done  by  pupils.  The  figures 
at  the  side  are  not  very  well  done.  Injured  by  re- 
painting. 

1700.   Portrait    of  a    Woman,     A   much-repainted 

portrait.  It  is  Fra  Filippo  only  in  a  vague  way 
though  a  true  enough  Florentine  picture.  The  col- 
our is  forbidding,  and  the  type  is  neither  very  force- 
ful in  character  nor  graceful  in  features.  The  same 
painter  did  a  double  portrait  with  a  Florentine 
coat  of  arms  upon  it  in  the  Metropolitan  Museum, 
New  York  (No.  256).  The  Berlin  portrait  is  a  re- 
cent acquisition. 

1081a.  LippO  Memmi.  Madonna  and  Child.  Good  in 
colour  as  also  in  the  gold  ground  with  its  tooled 
borders  and  haloes  so  rich  in  ornamental  design. 
It  is  too  much  varnished.     See  also  No.  1067. 

1077.  Lorenzetti,  Pietro.  St.  Humilitas  Healing  a 
Sick  Nun.  Interesting  Sienese  work  by  a  leader 
in  the  early  school.  There  is  largeness  in  the  forms 
and  great  simplicity  in  the  robes  and  architecture. 


LOTTO,  LORENZO  63 

Notice  the  figure  and  action  of  the  saint.  It  is 
work  akin  to  Giotto's  in  its  breadth.  See  also  No. 
1077a,  by  the  same  painter.  Both  belong  to  an 
altar-piece  in  the  Florence  Academy  (No.  133). 

Lotto,  Lorenzo.  Portrait  of  Architect.  It  be- 
longs to  Lotto's  middle  period  and  is  not  his  best 
endeavour  by  any  means.  It  has  some  of  the  large 
but  superficial  quality  of,  say,  a  Franciabigio, 
though  a  franker  effort  than  Franciabigio  was  ca- 
pable of.  With  very  positive  hands.  The  back- 
ground repainted. 

Portrait,    The   Lotto  spirit  here  has  rather 

overcome  the  personality  of  the  sitter.  But  the 
spirit  is  very  attractive,  as  always  with  Lotto. 
With  his  work  it  is  eminently  the  painter  rather 
than  the  painted — the  individual  view  and  expres- 
sion rather  than  the  object  seen. 

Portrait.    This  portrait  has  the  same  quality 

as  No.  182  but  is  possibly  more  interesting.  It  is  a 
study  for  the  painter  as  well  as  the  psychologist, 
for  it  has  some  large  seeing  and  doing  about  it. 
The  curtain  is  raised  at  the  right  to  give  a  glimpse 
of  the  sea.  Somewhat  injured  about  the  head  and 
its  background. 

St.  Sebastian  and  St.  Christopher.  A  beauti- 
ful white-skinned  Sebastian,  reminding  one  slightly 
of  Correggio,  with  the  sensitive  spirit  of  Lotto  re- 
vealed in  the  partly  shadowed  face  and  the  writh- 
ing, twisting  body.  A  remarkable  sea  below.  The 
companion  piece,  St.  Christopher,  is  apparently  a 
dark-skinned,  strong-bodied  contrast  to  the  St. 
Sebastian,  suggesting  a  following  of  Titian.  The 
child  is  Lottesque  and  charming.  Another  study 
of  the  open  sea  is  here  seen  below. 


64  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

325.    Christ    Leaving    His    Mother.      With    Lotto's 

*  usual  intensity  of  feeling  in  the  principal  characters 
— perhaps  this  time  a  little  too  intense.  What  a 
beautiful  type  that  golden-haired  saint  back  of  the 
Madonna!  And  what  a  columned  hall  with  its 
light-and-shade  and  the  garden  at  the  back!  It  is 
very  remarkable  architecture.  The  figures  are 
loosely  held  together.  Notice  the  figure  with  the 
book  at  right.     Somewhat  hurt. 

819c.    Maes,  Nicolas.     Woman  Peeling  Apples.    More 

*  attractive  at  first  blush  than  on  further  acquain- 
tance, though  it  is  a  very  good  Maes.  The  style  of 
it,  originally  derived  from  Rembrandt,  became 
stereotyped  and  mannered  in  the  hands  of  Maes. 
He  painted  the  same  effect  and  the  same  model 
again  and  again,  finally  painting  the  model  after 
she  was  dead,  with  a  similar  burst  of  hght  falling 
on  her  face  in  his  picture  at  Brussels  (No.  617), 
there  ascribed  to  the  Dutch  School. 

83.    Mainardi,  Bastiano.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman. 

The  portraiture  of  the  still-life  is  perhaps  better 
than  that  of  the  young  woman.  The  companion 
piece  to  this.  No.  86,  is  not  more  inspiring  but 
perhaps  more  doubtful  in  its  attribution. 

85.    Portrait  of  a  Cardinal.     A  somewhat  matter- 

of-fact  and  shallow  performance  with  something  of 
the  weakness  and  softness  of  No.  86. 

9.  Mantegna,  Andrea.  Portrait  of  Cardinal  Mes- 
*  sarota.  One  of  the  splendid  types  of  the  Renais- 
sance, full  of  power  and  dignity,  a  churchman, 
perhaps,  but  also  a  warrior  type.  It  is  done  in  a 
firm,  positive  manner,  quite  in  keeping  with  the 
type  of  the  sitter,  and  no  doubt  reveals  perfectly 


MARCO  D'OGGIONO  65 

in  its  rigid  drawing  the  character  of  the  man.  No- 
tice the  strength  of  colour  in  the  red  faintly  re- 
peated in  the  face  and  under  the  white  dress.  A 
fine  portrait. 

Presentation   of  Christ   in   the  Temple,     The 


drawing  is  sharp,  the  hands  such  as  the  Bellini 
frequently  painted,  the  colour  now  dull  but  har- 
monious. The  Madonna  has  a  frightened  look,  the 
Child  is  crying,  the  others  look  on  unconcerned. 
The  whole  picture  has  suffered  from  repainting. 
Compare  for  this  the  hair  and  the  drawing  of  the 
eyes  and  mouth  with  those  of  the  portrait  No.  9. 
This  may  account  for  the  dull,  lifeless  quality  of  the 
colour.  The  Madonna's  dress  and  the  priest's  robe 
are  attractive  in  pattern. 

-Madonna  and  Child.     It  is  possibly  an  early 


work  by  Mantegna,  though  doubted  by  some. 
The  sentiment  and  colour  are  both  good,  the  haloes 
are  rich  and,  with  the  fruit,  make  an  ornate  panel. 
The  drawing  is  as  sharp  as  a  Crivelli.  The  putti 
of  the  outside  framing  are  very  charming  in  both 
sentiment  and  drawing.  An  excellent  picture,  no 
matter  who  its  author. 

-Madonna  and  Child,     As  the  catalogue  sug- 


gests, it  shows  the  influence  of  Donatello.  It  is 
somewhat  repainted,  which  accounts  for  some  mo- 
notony of  colour.  The  drawing  is  still  good  and 
the  space  well  filled.  Notice  how  the  drapery 
carries  on  the  line  of  the  neck.     Simon  Collection. 

210a.  Marco  d'Oggiono.  St,  Sebastian.  The  figure 
is  clumsy,  the  angel  impossible,  the  landscape  done 
out  of  the  painter's  head  from  memory  of  Leonardo's 
landscapes.    Not  a  picture  of  any  marked  merit. 


66  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

1645.    Marmion,  Simon.  Life  of  St.  Bertin  —Altar  Wings. 

*  The  left  wing  contains  superb  French  architecture 
wonderfully  done  not  only  in  drawing  but  in  colour 
and  light.  The  sculptures  in  the  niches,  the  pat- 
tern under  the  roof  or  over  the  door  at  the  left  are 
excellent  in  relief  and  design.  The  drawing  of  the 
figures  is  not  over-exact  in  either  heads,  hands,  or 
robes,  but  the  characterisation  is  sufficient.  The 
sentiment  is  quite  right.  The  colour  is  clear  and 
beautiful,  as  see,  for  instance,  the  colour  of  the 
robe  and  shield  at  left  or  in  the  group  at  right. 
The  interior  scene  of  the  birth  at  the  left  is  excel- 
lent.    Notice  the  fine  castle  in  the  landscape. 

1645a.    Life     of     St,     Bertin— Right     Wing.      Com- 

*  panion  piece  to  No.  1645.  Done  in  the  same  vein 
and  spirit  as  the  preceding  number  and  with  much 
invention  and  imagination.  What  a  fine  effect 
looking  through  into  the  cloister,  with  its  frescoed 
Dance  of  Death  upon  the  walls!  The  robes  and 
architecture,  as  in  No.  1645,  are  all  beautifully 
done.  Marmion  is  only  a  name  in  French  minia- 
ture painting,  and  this  altar-piece  (part  of  it  is  in 
the  National  Gallery,  London)  is  the  only  large 
work  attributed  to  him  that  has  even  a  possibility 
of  authenticity  about  it.  It  is  not  by  any  means 
certain  that  Marmion  did  it,  but  whoever  its  author 
it  is  without  doubt  a  beautiful  example  of  the  early 
border  art  of  France  and  Flanders.  Its  like  is  not 
seen  elsewhere. 

58a  1  Masaccio,      Tomasso.      Adoration      of    Kings. 

58b  J  These  panels  are  probably  genuine  enough,  but 
they  are  slight  work  and  give  one  a  very  limited 
idea  of  Masaccio,  who  is  not  to  be  seen  adequately 
outside  the  walls  of  the  Carmine,  at  Florence. 


MASTER  OF  ST.  AEGIDIUS  67 

575  1  Master  of  Frankfort.  Altar-Piece,  These  panels 
575a  \  have  a  rather  coarse  grit  in  their  workmanship 
575b  J  but  their  total  effect  as  decoration  is  considerable. 
One  does  not  feel  this  so  much  in  the  central  panel, 
with  its  formal  arrangement  of  objects,  as  in  the 
panel  at  the  left  (No.  575a).  Here  the  figures  in 
their  brocades,  crowns,  caps,  and  emblems  are  very 
good.  How  well  they  carry  themselves!  How 
gracefully  their  robes  fall  from  the  hips  down!  The 
white  figures  of  No.  575b  have,  perhaps,  more  re- 
finement of  feeling  than  the  others. 
Massys,  Quentin.    See  Metsys. 

Master  of  the  Death  of  the  Virgin.    See  Cleve, 

Juste  van. 
538a.    Master    of    Flemalle.     Christ    on    the    Cross. 

The  figure  is  frail  and  attenuated,  the  draperies 
angular,  the  drawing  rather  harsh  in  outline.  The 
picture  is  restless  but  very  tragic  in  its  expression 
of  grief.  In  colour  it  is  high  in  key  and  somewhat 
scattered — the  sky  at  the  top  and  the  blue  at  the 
bottom  being,  perhaps,  out  of  tone  through  re- 
painting. But  the  tragedy  of  it  is  compelling. 
The  Master  of  Flemalle  was  galvanised  into  life  by 
several  art  critics  about  1898.  Wauters  would 
identify  him  with  Hubert  van  Eyck  and  others 
with  Jacques  Daret,  but  the  present  tendency  is 
to  identify  him  with  Robert  Campin.  He  was  at 
first  called  the  Master  of  Merode.  The  personality 
is  still  something  of  a  puzzle  and  the  works^of  sev- 
eral painters  have  been  attributed  to  the  name. 

L704.  Master  of  St.  Aegidius.  St.  Jerome.  The  figure 
and  robe  are  finely  done  as  also  the  foliage  and 
landscape.  Notice  the  pattern  of  leaves  and  flow- 
ers about  the  Cross. 


68  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

810a.    Meer  of  Haarlem,  Jan  van  der.    Landscape, 

A  view  of  Holland  with  a  high  sky  full  of  clouds 
and  a  strong,  dark  foreground.  The  colour  effect 
is  very  good.  A  picture  that  is  Rembrandtesque 
in  its  foreground. 

54    1  Melozzo  da   Forli.     Astronomy   and  Dialectics. 

54a  j  Somewhat  formal  compositions.  Two  companion 
pieces  are  in  the  National  Gallery,  London  (Nos. 
755  and  756).  They  are  too  heavy  for  Melozzo, 
the  man  who  did  the  angels  (parts  of  frescoes)  in 
the  sacristy  of  St.  Peter's  at  Rome.  Modern  criti- 
cism gives  these  works  to  Justus  of  Ghent. 

222.    Melzi,     Francesco.     Pomona    and     Vertumnus. 

The  figure  at  the  left  shows  an  imitation  of  Leo- 
nardo's contours  and  draperies  very  gracefully  ren- 
dered— perhaps  too  gracefully.  The  face  is  merely 
sweet.  A  pretty  picture,  with  the  exception  of  the 
figure  at  the  right,  which  is  dull  and  heavy.  The 
landscape  is  spiritless. 
528b.  Memling,  Hans.  Madonna  and  Child.  It  is 
possibly  by  Memling  but  seems  to  lack  in  quality. 
Doubtless  the  centre  portion  of  an  altar-piece  the 
wings  of  which  are  in  the  Uffizi  at  Florence.  The 
wings  suggest  a  following  of  David.  This  is  not  a 
wholly  satisfactory  piece.     See  the  catalogue  note. 

529.  Madonna  and  Child  Enthroned.  In  Mem- 
ling's  style  and  showing  his  types.  The  landscape 
is  a  little  formal  but  decorative.  The  motive  and 
subject  are  frequently  repeated.  These  Madonnas 
with  bumpy  foreheads  are  sometimes  given  to 
Bouts,  to  Van  der  Weyden,  to  Van  der  Goes  in 
the  European  galleries.  They  are  all  probably 
versions  or  copies  of  the  work  of  some  one  man  as 
yet  unidentified. 


METSYS,  QUENTIN  69 

529c.   Portrait  of  an  Old  Man.    The  face  has  been 

flattened  by  cleaning  but  still  has  force  in  it.  A 
companion  piece  to  a  recently  acquired  Portrait 
of  an  Old  Woman  in  the  Louvre.  Early  work  and 
possessed  of  truth  and  virility.  The  blacks  in  con- 
nection with  the  flesh  colour  are  well  handled. 

529d.  Madonna  and  Child  Enthroned,  It  is  Mem- 
ling's  type  of  Madonna  and  Child,  also  his  back- 
ground; but  the  picture  has  no  quality  in  drawing 
or  colour.  It  might  be  a  school  piece  or  an  old 
copy.  There  are  many  versions  of  it.  Somewhat 
cleaned  and  repainted. 

792c.  Metsu,  Gabriel.  The  Sick  Woman.  The  whites 
are  perhaps  too  high  but  the  sick  figure  is  well 
drawn  and  painted,  as  also  the  grief-stricken  one 
at  the  side.  A  good  picture  by  Metsu  who,  at  his 
best,  was  almost  in  the  Terborch  class. 

561.  Metsys,  Quentin.  Madonna  and  Child  En- 
throned. The  Madonna,  the  Child,  and  the  robes 
are  done  smoothly,  and  there  is  a  Luinesque  sweet- 
ness in  the  types.  Notice  the  slightness  of  the  arm 
and  hand.  The  head-gear,  throne,  and  landscape 
still  suggest  the  early  Flemish  method  of  working 
in  detail.  There  is  effective  painting  of  the  glass 
and  bread.  And  a  very  pretty  rose  garden  at  the 
right.  The  colour  is  bright  but  very  satisfactory. 
The  catalogue  calls  it  a  school  copy  of  a  picture  in 
St.  Jacques,  Antwerp.  Another  version  at  Amster- 
dam (No.  1529). 

574c.      The  Magdalen.     A  fine  bit  of  colour  and  very 

well  painted.  It  has  some  North  Italian,  Milanese 
feeling  about  it  almost  indescribable.  A  detail, 
perhaps,  of  a  larger  picture  of  the  Deposition,  which 
has  been  cut  out  and  framed  up  in  its  present  form. 


70  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

A  similar  face  in  the  Deposition  by  Metsys,  at 
Antwerp.     This  picture  may  be  a  version  of  it. 

960b.    Molyn,  Pieter.     Evening.     A  work  of  the  very 

*  best  quality  in  landscape.  Notice  the  rare  colour 
in  the  sky.  And  yet  all  that  the  world  has  ever 
done  for  this  painter  has  been  to  take  his  best  pic- 
tures away  from  him  and  give  them  to  Rembrandt, 
or  Vermeer  of  Haarlem,  or  some  one  with  a  gallery 
reputation.  The  inferior  Molyns  are  still  under 
the  name  of  Molyns. 

44.  Montagna,  Bartolotnmeo.  Madonna  Enthroned 
with  Saints,  Somewhat  austere  and  cold  with  a 
Paduan  or  Veronese  influence  apparent  in  the  Ma- 
donna. Notice  the  diminutive  figure  of  St.  Cath- 
erine with  her  wheel  at  the  bottom.     Injured. 

44b.    Christ  between  Saints.     A  dark  picture,  very 

mannered  in  the  drawing  of  drapery  and  types  but 
very  true  in  feeling  and  spirit.  The  Magdalen 
kneeling  at  the  back  and  the  attitude  of  the  Christ 
are  remarkable.  The  composition  is  odd,  as  though 
the  picture  were  designed  for  a  triptych.  It  has 
colour  quality  and  much  strength  of  drawing.  To 
be  studied  in  connection  with  No.  46c,  by  Bon- 
signori — a  kindred  spirit. 
197.    Moretto  da  Brescia   (Alessandro  Bonvicino). 

*  Madonna  and  St.  Elizabeth  in  Glory.  A  double 
composition  or  two  pictures  on  one  canvas,  held 
together  slightly  by  the  little  angel  with  the  scroll. 
A  beautiful  altar-piece  in  its  fine  types,  the  dignity 
and  loftiness  of  the  general  conception,  and  its 
silvery  tone  of  colour.  Notice  the  wonderful  old 
bishop  at  the  left  with  his  superbly  drawn  robes. 
Moretto  was  not  one  of  the  great  gods  of  art,  but 
still  a  man  of  much  force  and  ability.     And  with 


NETHERLAND  SCHOOL  71 

a  fine  colour  sense.  The  relation  of  the  flesh-notes 
to  the  white  robes  and  the  robes  to  the  pale  silver 
of  the  sky  is  noteworthy. 

193.    Moroni,  Giovanni  Battista.     Portrait  of  a  Man, 

The  sitter  apparently  has  struck  a  supercilious  air 
and  attitude.  A  very  good  portrait,  however,  and 
far  from  being  commonplace.  At  one  time  thought 
to  be  a  likeness  of  the  painter.     A  little  injured. 

193a.    Portrait  of  a   Scholar.     With  red   hair,   red 

*  flesh,  red  hands,  and  black  clothes  on  a  dark  grey 
ground.  A  fine  portrait  and  one  of  Moroni's  best 
efforts.  What  a  look  and  pose  and  character! 
How  well  it  is  drawn  in  the  mouth,  chin,  and  hands ! 
It  is  a  work  of  sterling  quality  without  being  in- 
spired. 

167.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Man,     This  portrait  has 

not  the  interest  of  either  No.  193  or  No.  193a.  It 
is  a  little  dull  and  monotonous  in  colour. 

414.  Murillo,  Bartolom6  Est6ban.  St,  Francis  and 
the  Christ  Child.  Sentimental  and  consequently 
popular  but  not  so  good  a  work  as  No.  414c.  It 
is  messy  in  the  painting  and  frail  in  the  lighting, 
though  striving  for  a  forceful,  Ribera-like  effect. 

414c.    Adoration  of  Shepherds.     An  unusually  good 

Murillo.  The  Madonna  inclines  to  prettiness,  but 
the  shepherds,  especially  the  kneeling  one,  are 
rather  fine.  The  colour  is  very  acceptable  for 
Murillo. 

526a.  Netherland  School.  Deposition,  A  picture 
set  down  to  no  celebrated  master  and  yet  just  as 
beautiful  in  sentiment,  in  pathos,  in  colour,  in  all 
the  features  that  go  to  make  up  fine  painting,  as 
other  panels  of  loftier  birth  and  pedigree.     The 


72  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

subject,  the  drawing  of  the  Christ,  the  St.  John  at 
the  left,  all  point  toward  Roger  van  der  Weyden's 
studio.  The  picture  probably  came  out  of  that 
studio. 

630c.    Decapitation     of   John     the    Baptist.      This 

picture  belongs,  with  the  pseudo-Bles  picture  at 
Munich  (No.  146),  to  a  painter  confused  with 
Bles  or  maybe  Bles  himself  in  decadence.  See  the 
note  on  the  Munich  picture  (No.  146).  This  is  a 
good  picture  and  perhaps  up  to  the  average  panel 
attributed  to  Bles. 

630b.    Christ  and  the  Holy  Women.     A  picture  of 

*  both  passion  and  power.  There  is  not  only  depth 
but  strength  in  the  light,  shadow,  and  colour.  The 
contours  of  faces  and  figures  are  smooth  but  the 
figures  and  their  action  are  forceful.  What  beauti- 
ful colour  in  the  robes  at  the  left!  One  can  only 
guess  at  its  painter. 

538b.  Netherland  School,  15th  Century.  Death  of 
the  Madonna.  An  effective  grouping  of  both  forms 
and  colours  in  a  believable  interior.  Its  author  is 
difficult  to  locate.  A  similar  picture  is  in  the 
Prague  Gallery.  Van  der  Goes  possibly  painted 
both  panels. 

Oggiono.     See  Marco  d'Oggiono. 

845d.  Ostade,  Isaac  van.  A  Peasant.  This  is  a  pic- 
ture that  should  be  studied  as  a  piece  of  large  draw- 
ing and  free  handling  quite  worthy  of  Adriaen  van 
Ostade  or  even  Brouwer.  There  is  nothing  petty 
about  it.  Notice  how  it  holds  at  a  distance  and 
reveals  the  body,  bulk,  and  substance  of  the  figure. 

532a.    Ouwater,    Aelbert    van.     Raising    of    Lazarus. 

**     A  balanced  composition  with  Lazarus  in  the  centre 


PALMA,  VECCfflO  73 

and  an  architectural  ground  at  the  back.  The 
drawing  is  exact,  especially  in  the  feet  and  hands, 
after  the  Flemish  manner  of  the  Van  Eycks.  The 
draperies  are  liny  and  break  into  angles  at  the 
floor,  the  brocades  are  superb,  and  the  patterns 
upon  them  are  wrought  with  goldsmith-like  pre- 
cision. Look  at  the  robes  and  Jewish  head-dresses 
at  the  right  and  the  coloured  head-gear  seen 
through  the  grated  door  at  the  back.  What  a 
splendour  of  colour  and  how  well  the  truth  of  it 
is  preserved  under  light  and  under  shadow!  And 
what  excellent  architecture!  A  fine  picture  with  a 
sincere  spirit.  Notice  the  sentiment,  the  feeling 
of  the  kneeling  figure  at  the  left.  There  is  little  or 
nothing  known  about  the  painter  or  his  work,  so 
the  assertion  of  the  catalogue  that  this  is  "  the  only 
authentic  painting  by  him"  holds  true  for  the  pres- 
ent time.  He  is  said  to  have  been  a  pupil  of  the 
Van  Eycks.  The  relation  between  Ouwater  and 
Bouts — he  was  supposed  to  have  influenced  Bouts 
— seems  obvious,  or  at  least  their  pictures  have  a 
likeness  to  one  another  in  types  and  colour. 

144.  Padua,  School  of.  Bewailing  the  Christ,  This 
picture  is  to  be  compared  with  Nos.  1170a  and  1678. 
All  three  pictures  had  a  common  origin  at  Padua 
or  Venice  and  are  illustrations  of  the  sincere  if 
exaggerated  way  in  which  the  passion  and  death 
of  Christ  were  depicted  by  the  northern  painters 
of  the  Vivarini-Bellini-Squarcione  Schools.  This 
No.  1144  is  of  about  the  same  time  as  the  others, 
and  has  their  depth  of  colour  and  tragic  quality. 

31.   Palma,  Vecchio.    Madonna  and  Child,    Much 

repainted,  and,  in  spite  of  the  signature,  it  seems 
too  slight  in  quality  for  Palma.     It  may  be  a  very 


74  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

early  work  but  it  has  the  bloodless  look  of  a  Catena. 
Compare  its  reds,  whites,  and  flesh  colour  with  the 
undoubtedly  genuine  Palma,  No.  197b.  In  any 
event  it  is  of  no  great  importance. 

174.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Man,    A  Palmesque  figure, 

but  whether  by  Palma  or  not  is  not  so  certain. 
Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle  thought  it  genuine.  The 
head  is  rather  badly  placed  on  the  neck  and  the 
hands  seem  things  apart  from  the  body.  It  has 
been  much  cleaned  and  the  hands,  face,  and  neck 
repainted  in  parts. 

183.   Holy  Family.     Whoever  painted  it,  the  work 

itself  is  not  vitally  important  as  art.  It  is  not 
certainly  a  Palma  for  all  the  large,  blond  character 
of  the  Madonna.  The  landscape,  however,  is  sim- 
ilar to  his  work. 

197a.    Half-Length  of  a  Young  Woman.    This  is  too 

much  repainted  to  tell  what  was  its  original  look. 
It  has  the  appearance,  the  type,  the  general  air  of 
a  Palma,  but  compare  it  with  No.  197b  and  there 
will  be  considerable  difference  noticeable  in  the 
whites,  reds,  and  flesh-notes.  It  has  the  signed 
initials  "R.  L." 

197b.    Half-Length  of  a  Young  Woman.     A  superb 

**  Palma!  A  little  over-cleaned,  but  what  a  splendid 
type  of  beauty!  And  what  drawing  and  colour! 
Try  the  quality  of  the  whites,  reds,  and  flesh-notes 
with  the  other  attributed  Palmas  in  this  gallery, 
and  what  a  difference !  This  is  the  genuine  "  large, 
blond  type,"  not  the  imitation,  and  has  body  and 
substance  to  it  with  beautiful  lines  and  most  grace- 
ful contours.  A  fine  picture.  Never  mind  about 
the  young  woman's  type  or  superfluous  flesh. 
Look  at  the  line,  light,  and  colour  of  it. 


PATINIR,  JOACHIM  75 

1129a.  Palmezzano,  Marco.  Christ  Standing  before 
the  Cross.  Very  picturesque  in  the  four  little  fig- 
ures in  the  landscape  at  the  back.  The  Christ  is 
somewhat  weak  in  type  and  pretty  in  colour. 
Palmezzano  was  not  at  any  time  a  very  strong 
painter  though  he  had  a  sense  of  the  pictorial  and 
the  decorative. 

131.   Nativity.    Those    who    have   studied   Marco 

Palmezzano  at  the  Brera,  Milan,  and  elsewhere 
will,  perhaps,  view  this  picture  with  some  surprise. 
It  is  a  rocky,  knotty-looking  affair,  but  it  is  much 
better  held  together  than  is  usual  with  this  painter's 
work.  And  it  is  better  in  colour  and  sentiment. 
The  drawing  is  hard  and  the  landscape  airless,  but 
it  is,  nevertheless,  an  imposing  Palmezzano. 

113.    Panetti,  Domenico.    Lamenting  the  Dead  Christ. 

A  large,  Costa-like  landscape  with  a  lake  in  the 
centre  in  which  St.  Christopher  is  walking.  The 
foreground  figures  are  subdued  in  colour  and  there 
has  been  an  evident  attempt  to  harmonise  them 
with  the  landscape — make  them  fit  in  it.  It  is  an 
interesting  picture  by  a  painter  little  known  out- 
side of  Ferrara.     He  was  the  master  of  Garofalo. 

608.    Patinir,  Joachim.     Rest  in  Flight  into  Egypt. 

The  Madonna  and  Child,  with  the  basket  and 
bags,  are  rightly  placed  in  the  landscape  and  are 
beautiful  in  colour,  but  the  foreground  and  back- 
ground of  the  landscape  do  not  marry — do  not 
blend  together.  The  blue-green  is  false  in  value. 
The  foreground,  with  its  figures  and  houses,  is  in 
perfect  keeping  with  the  Madonna  and  Child,  but 
not  the  background.  A  similar  picture  at  Antwerp 
(No.  47)  is  put  down  as  a  copy  after  Gerard  David. 
Better  works  of  Patinir  are  seen  at  the  Prado, 


76  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

Madrid  (Nos.  1613,  1614,  1615).     Sometimes  work 
of  this  subject  and  character  is  given  to  Isenbrant     J 
— a  pupil  of  David  about  whose  work  we  know 
nothing. 

1166.  Pennacchi,  Pier  Maria.  Entombment,  A  pa- 
thetic picture,  rather  pretty  and  not  powerful,  but 
given  with  good  feeling.  The  little  angels  are 
naive  creations  both  in  sentiment  and  colour. 

49.    Madonna,  Child,  and  Saints,     The  drawing  of 

the  nose  is  hard  and  all  the  eyes  pop  out  of  the 
faces.  The  Child  is  pretty  and  quite  conscious 
of  it.  Even  the  Madonna  is  somehow  posing  for 
her  picture.  But  taken  as  colour  alone  the  pic- 
ture is  effective.  It  has  been  recently  promoted 
from  the  "Venetian  School"  to  Pennacchi,  for 
reasons  given  in  the  catalogue  note. 

1651.  Pesellino,  Francesco.  Crucifixion.  Only  a  little 
scrap  of  a  picture,  but  full  of  colour  charm  and  fine 
feeling.  What  beautiful  colours  upon  gold  I  And 
what  a  beautiful  fiUing  of  the  pyramidal  space  I 

107.    Piero  di  Cosimo.      Venus,    Mars,  and   Love.     A 

*  little  wooden  and  stiff  in  the  joints  but  captivat- 
ing in  its  almost  boyish  attempt  at  presenting  a 
Greek  idyl.  Giorgione  and  Titian  did  this  sort  of 
a  thing  much  better,  more  maturely  and  completely, 
but  Piero,  who  was  always  a  little  erratic,  is  naive 
in  his  awkwardness  and  attractive,  perhaps,  because 
of  his  halting  lines  and  colours.  Notice  how  the 
arm  of  Mars  is  sharply  repeated  in  the  angle  of 
armour.  The  white  veiling  and  linen  of  Venus 
with  the  happy  little  Love  and  the  rabbit  are  in- 
teresting studies  in  whites,  and  the  pieces  of  the 
armour  good  studies  in  textures.    Notice  also  the 


PIOMBO,  SEBASTIANO  DEL  77 

painting  of  flowers,  trees,  and  grass  in  the  land- 
scape with  the  Uttle  cupids  and  the  sea  at  the  back. 
Also  the  doves  and  rabbits. 

204.    Adoration    of  Shepherds.     A    late    work    and 

more  mature  than  No.  107.  The  figures  and  drap- 
ery are  sharp-edged  in  their  drawing,  but  there 
is  good  movement.  The  peasant  types  back  of 
Joseph  might  have  been  inspired  by  Van  der  Goes 
(never  by  Cosimo  Roselli  or  Leonardo),  so  reahstic 
are  they.  What  a  charming  figure  that  of  the  Ma- 
donna! What  a  fine  sky  and  landscape!  Notice 
the  tranquil  indifference  of  the  generously  propor- 
tioned ox  lying  along  the  edge  of  a  quarry  at  the 
back  and  the  waiting  donkey  above  him. 

132a.  Pinturicchio,  Bernardino.  A  Reliquary,  Sts. 
Augustine,  Benedict,  and  Bernard.  It  is  done  in 
water-colour  and  is  crude  in  the  drawing  and  rather 
careless  in  the  handling.  Notice  the  doing  of  the 
clouds  and  the  hands.  Perhaps  an  early  work  with 
the  painter  bothered  by  the  medium. 

143.   Madonna    and    Child.     Not  great  either  in 

thought  or  execution  but  very  charming  in  its  sen- 
timent and  graceful  colour.  It  is  possibly  not  by 
Pinturicchio  but  is  near  him  and  of  the  Umbrian 
School.     Venturi  thinks  it  by  Antonio  da  Viterbo. 

259b.  Piombo,  Sebastiano  del.  Portrait  of  a  Young 
*  Roman  Woman.  A  portrait  sometimes  known  as 
"Dorothea,"  done  in  the  Roman  manner  of  the 
painter  but  Giorgionesque  in  spirit.  The  picture 
(long  thought  to  be  a  Raphael)  shows  the  same 
model  as  the  so-called  Fornarina  of  the  UfHzi  (No. 
1123),  also  once  put  down  to  Raphael.  They  are 
both  from  the  hand  of  Sebastiano,  together  with 


78  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

the  picture  in  San  Giobbe,  Venice,  in  which  this 
same  model  again  appears.  The  figure  is  a  Uttle 
soft  in  line  for  Sebastiano,  and  academic  in  its 
hands.  Shown  in  a  Roman  contadina  dress.  The 
landscape  at  the  left  interesting.  The  picture 
somewhat  repainted. 

95a.  Pisanello  (Vittorio  or  Antonio  Pisano).  Ado- 
ration of  Kings.  What  a  decorative  circle  it  is !  It 
would  look  well  even  if  hung  upside  down,  so  rich 
is  it  in  colour.  And  how  attractive  it  is  in  its 
romantic  people,  with  their  fine,  picturesque  gar- 
ments in  that  mediaeval  valley,  with  its  story  of  a 
birth  in  the  foreground,  and  its  suggestion  of  death 
by  hanging  in  the  background!  What  a  story 
could  be  woven  out  of  this  group  in  the  valley  I 
But  the  painter  has  made  the  picture  solely  for  its 
looks — made  it  out  of  costumes,  horses,  rude  strong 
heads,  castles,  sea,  and  sky.  A  decorative  piece 
almost  primitive  in  methods,  rather  summarily 
executed,  not  well  drawn,  and  by  no  means  the 
last  word  in  Italian  painting.  The  landscape  is 
better  than  the  figures.  The  picture  has  been  vari- 
ously attributed  and  does  not  speak  positively  for 
Pisanello.  The  types,  the  drawing,  the  landscape 
are  hardly  his.  It  is  probably  by  some  one  near 
him,  though  Venturi  thinks  it  of  the  School  of 
Paolo  Uccello. 

73a.  PoUajuolo,  Antonio.  David.  A  delightful  lit- 
*  tie  picture  I  And  a  masterpiece  in  its  individuality, 
its  line  drawing,  and  its  fine  colour.  It  is  some- 
what awkward  in  the  Donatello  St.  George  attitude, 
with  that  naive  awkwardness  that  belongs  to  all 
the  early  Renaissance  men.  A  romantic,  even  a 
dandified,  David.     Done  about  the  same  time  as 


POTTER,  PAULUS  79 

the  Apollo  and  Daphne  in  the  National  Gallery, 
London  (No.  928),  and  in  the  same  poetic  vein, 
yet  based  upon  substantial  truth  and  accurate 
Florentine  drawing. 

73.    PoUajUOlo,  Piero.      The  Annunciation,     The  pic- 

*  ture  is  confusing  at  first  because  of  the  insistent 
architecture  and  because  the  panel  is  cut  in  two 
by  the  central  architectural  partition.  The  angel 
in  the  corridor  is  one  picture;  the  Madonna  at  the 
right  is  another  picture.  The  painter,  as  it  were, 
pulled  out  some  of  the  architecture  to  make  a 
unity  of  the  halves  and  with  not  too  good  a  re- 
sult. But,  on  examination  of  the  parts,  this  proves 
an  absorbing  work.  The  Renaissance  architecture 
is  superb ;  the  room,  with  its  door  and  window  look- 
ing out  on  the  landscape,  its  panelled  walls  and 
marble  floor  and  beautiful  bed,  is  magnificent.  As 
for  the  figures,  the  gorgeously  robed  and  jewelled 
angel  with  the  message  is  full  of  pathos  and  the 
ill-drawn  Madonna,  tall  and  stately,  is  meekly  re- 
ceptive. Notice  the  wealth  and  the  harmony  of 
the  colour  and,  once  more,  the  beauty  of  the  archi- 
tectural patterns,  the  windows  and  doors  at  left, 
the  charming  little  landscape,  the  wonderful  floor. 
The  figures  and  draperies  are  not  very  accurate  in 
their  drawing.  The  picture  is  uneven  in  execution 
as  though  more  than  one  hand  had  been  working 
upon  it,  which  was  probably  the  case.  But  its 
general  effect  is  very  fine. 

832a.  Porcellis,  Jan.  Marine.  A  beautiful  little  sea 
piece  with  attractive  colour.  This  painter's  works 
are  not  frequently  seen  in  public  galleries. 

872a.  Potter,  Paulus.  Landscape.  As  usual  with 
Potter,  we  have  acrid  green  foliage,  hard  cattle, 


80  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

and  cast-iron  dogs.  The  petty  niggling  of  the 
leaves  and  the  dryness  of  the  handling  are  notable. 
And  still  Potter  is  regarded  as  a  wonder  in  Dutch 
painting — a  wonder  among  the  Dutch,  the  most 
accomplished  of  all  the  painter  craftsmen! 

39.    Previtali,  Andrea.     Madonna,  Child,  and  Saints. 

It  is  superficial  in  every  way — something  done  for 
sale,  perhaps,  more  than  for  love  of  art.  No.  45 
by  Previtali  is  no  improvement  on  No.  39,  being 
pretty  in  the  types  and  the  treatment.  The  cata- 
logue regards  the  painter  as  identical  with  Cordelle 
Agii.     See  the  National  Gallery  note  on  Previtali. 

141.  Raphael  Sanzio.  Madonna  and  Child  {The  Solly 
Madonna),  All  the  Raphaels  in  this  gallery  are 
early  works  and  show  Raphael  in  his  rather  pretty 
Peruginesque  manner.  They  do  not  represent  the 
painter  adequately,  though  they  are  gracefully 
composed,  with  smooth  surfaces  and  flowing  lines, 
and  even  as  early  works  show  some  individuality. 
This  Solly  Madonna  was  done  under  Perugino's 
direct  influence.  A  comparison  with  No.  147  hang- 
ing near  it  will  demonstrate  that  this  No.  141  is 
better  drawn  in  the  face  of  the  Madonna,  the  body 
of  the  Child,  and  in  the  hands  and  the  feet.  The 
type  of  face  is  rounder,  the  colour  lighter,  the 
painting  freer,  as  notice  the  plumage  of  the  bird. 
Notice  also  the  drawing  of  the  trees  and  the  foli- 
age.    The  hair  is  rather  flat. 

145.    Madonna,   Child,  and  Two  Saints  {The  Ma^ 

donna  of  St,  Jerome.)  This  was  done  a  little  later, 
perhaps,  than  No.  141,  and  is  not  so  well  done  as 
No.  247a.  Notice  the  drawing  (and  slight  re- 
painting) of  the  fingers.  The  painting  of  the  hair 
of  the  saints  is  not  very  different  from  that  of  No. 


RAPHAEL  SANZIO  81 

141.  It  is  apparently  a  less  accurate  work,  though 
this  is  rendered  somewhat  uncertain  by  the  fact 
that  it  is  not,  perhaps,  so  free  from  retouching. 

147.    Madonna,  Child,  and  St.  John.     It  is  nice  in 

sentiment  and  very  Peruginesque  in  workmanship. 
The  colour  is  deep  in  reds  and  blues.  The  hands 
and  fingers  a  little  repainted.  It  is  not  precisely 
Raphaelesque.  As  the  catalogue  suggests,  it  be- 
longs somewhere  near  the  Perugino  workshop. 
Known  as  the  Madonna  della  Casa  Diotalevi. 

247a.    Madonna,    Child,    and  St.  John    {The  Ma- 

*  donna  Terra  Nuova).  Done  by  the  young  Raphael, 
probably  in  Florence,  and  showing  the  influence  of 
Leonardo  in  the  face,  eyelids,  contours,  and  fore- 
shortened hand  of  the  Madonna.  And  of  Fra  Bar- 
tolommeo,  perhaps,  in  the  pyramidal  composition 
and  the  draperies.  The  faces  are  now  changed  from 
the  Perugino  types  shown  in  Nos.  141  and  145. 
The  composition  is  also  more  graceful,  the  dispo- 
sition of  the  figures  on  the  panel  freer,  the  feel- 
ing of  space  in  the  landscape  greater.  The  painting 
is  very  good.  Notice  the  doing  of  the  hair  of 
the  Madonna,  the  Child,  and  the  St.  John  at  the 
left.  Perhaps  the  best  of  the  Raphaels  in  this  col- 
lection, though  the  composition  is  not  so  mature 
as  in  No.  248. 

248.    Madonna  and  Child  {The  Colonna  Madonna). 

*  This  is  the  latest  Raphael  here.  It  is  an  oval  of 
figures  on  an  upright  panel  and  happily  carried 
out.  It  is  much  freer  in  drawing,  better  composed, 
and  fills  the  space  better  in  every  way  than  his 
Peruginesque  examples.  As  a  piece  of  linear  draw- 
ing showing  Raphael's  sense  of  line  and  as  a  grace- 
ful composition  showing  the  feeling  of  action,  even 


82  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

though  the  figures  are  seated,  it  is  a  success.  But 
aside  from  the  design  there  is  httle  to  admire. 
The  key  of  colour  is  different  from  the  other 
Raphaels  here.  The  handling  is  tentative  and  dis- 
turbing and,  perhaps,  shows  another  brush  than 
Raphael's.  It  is  difficult  to  reconcile  it  with 
Raphael's  other  work  at  this  time.  Notice  the 
hair  and  compare  it  with  the  earlier  No.  247a,  or 
the  drawing  of  the  eyes  in  both  Madonna  and 
Child,  or  the  left  hand  of  the  Madonna.  Notice 
also  the  trees  with  their  scant  drawing  and  man- 
nered foliage.  The  landscape  is  the  same  in  han- 
dling as  in  the  Raphael  (No.  168)  in  the  National 
Gallery,  London.  The  picture  is  anomalous.  It 
has  Raphael's  spirit,  life,  grace,  movement,  but  it 
is  not  painted  in  Raphael's  style  nor  in  any  other 
satisfactory  manner.  The  design  is  excellent,  but 
the  surface  lacks  in  distinction.  It  is  said  to  be 
unfinished,  but  more  likely  the  surface  has  been 
thumbed  over  by  another  hand. 
823.  Rembrandt  van  Ryn.  Rape  of  Proserpina. 
The  ascription  of  pictures  to  Rembrandt  in  the 
various  European  galleries  is  by  no  means  satisfac- 
tory or  even  comprehensible.  Almost  all  of  the  gal- 
lery catalogues  confuse  the  student  by  placing  pic- 
tures that  contradict  one  another  under  the  name 
of  Rembrandt.  The  Berlin  Catalogue  is  no  ex- 
ception. This  is  a  little  surprising,  because  its 
director  (1912)  is  widely  known  as  an  authority 
on  Rembrandt.  Perhaps  the  various  ascriptions 
here  are  justifiable,  but  let  us  meet  the  situation  by 
frankly  declaring  the  difficulty. 

It  may  be  accepted  as  fact  that  Rembrandt  had, 
generally  speaking,  (1)  an  early  period  of  producing 
pictures  with  a  grey  ground  and  a  generally  grey 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  83 

tone — his  grey  period;  (2)  a  middle  period,  when 
he  used  golden-browns  and  had  golden  backgrounds 
and  draperies — his  golden  period;  (3)  a  late  period, 
when  his  hand  seemed  somewhat  less  interested  in 
details,  his  colours  became  a  little  muddy,  his  sur- 
faces somewhat  thumbed,  his  general  tone  some- 
what foxy — his  hot,  foxy  period.  Now,  in  none  of 
these  technical  periods  did  he  paint  black  or  non- 
luminous  shadows,  or  square-block  hands,  with 
long,  square  fingers,  or  heads  without  skulls  and 
backs  to  them.  Moreover,  at  no  time  in  his  career 
and  in  none  of  his  pictures  does  he  show  the  small 
trivial  mind  and  hand  of  a  Dou,  or  the  inconstant 
mind  and  hand  of  a  Bol,  or  the  merely  superficial 
mind  and  hand  of  a  Poorter,  or  the  wandering, 
desultory  mind  and  hand  of  an  Eeckhout.  It  is 
conceivable  that  he  had  a  large  workshop  full  of 
pupils  and  that,  like  Giovanni  Bellini  and  others, 
he  put  the  workshop  stamp  (his  own  signature)  on 
pictures  going  out  of  his  studio.  That  may  account 
for  some  signatures  on  pictures  which  he  almost 
certainly  never  painted.  And  it  would  also  account 
in  measure  for  the  scarcity  on  the  face  of  the  earth 
of  pictures  by  his  pupils. 

In  the  Berlin  Gallery  the  pictures  he  probably 
painted  may  be  roughly  divided  as  follows: 

The  early  grey  period;  nothing  with  certainty — 
Nos.  802,  808,  and  810  are  questionable. 

The  golden-brown  period,  or  approaching  it — 
Nos.  812,  828l. 

The  late  dark  or  foxy  period — Nos.  828a,  811a. 

We  now  take  up  the  pictures  individually  and  in 
order,  beginning  with  No.  823 — The  Rape  of 
Proserpina. 

The  mental  conception  and  the  artistic  sense  in 


84  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

the  Rape  of  Proserpina  are  much  too  small  for 
Rembrandt.  He  was  of  a  universal  mind  and  early 
saw  and  did  things  in  a  large  way,  as  we  know  by 
the  Lesson  in  Anatomy  at  The  Hague,  the  Cop- 
penol  at  Cassel,  the  Burggraef  at  Dresden.  This 
picture  cannot  be  put  down  as  an  early  Rembrandt 
or  in  his  early  manner.  It  is  the  work  of  a  mature 
hand  seeing  and  painting  in  a  small  way,  not  draw- 
ing hard  and  sharp  as  a  beginner  always  does, 
whether  Velasquez  or  Rubens  or  Rembrandt.  The 
sweet  sky,  the  pretty  foliage,  the  tricky  overmod- 
elled  heads  with  the  petty  spots  of  light  are  wholly 
alien  to  Rembrandt's  conception  and  only  super- 
ficially reminiscent  of  his  method  of  work.  The 
real  author  of  this  picture  is  not  so  important  to 
us  as  the  establishment  of  the  fact  that  Rembrandt 
did  not  do  it.  It  was  formerly  ascribed  to  Jan 
van  Vliet,  and  perhaps  the  small  niggled  vegeta- 
tion in  the  foreground  and  the  blue-green  envelope 
were  peculiar  to  him,  for  they  were  certainly  never 
peculiar  to  Rembrandt.  Houbraken  thought  it  by 
the  unknown  Terlee.  See  the  notes  on  Rembrandt 
at  The  Hague  for  different  kinds  of  pictures  attrib- 
uted to  him. 
N.  N.  The  Rape  of  Europa.  This  is  another  illus- 
tration of  a  small  point  of  view  carried  out  in  a 
sweet  trifling  method.  It  is  in  the  style  of  Ko- 
ninck  or  Willem  de  Poorter  but  far  removed  from 
Rembrandt,  both  mentally  and  technically.  No- 
tice the  pretty  sky  and  sea  and  foliage  and  the 
prettified  Dutch  types  with  their  ballroom  dresses. 
It  is  an  unimportant  picture,  but  it  might  be  com- 
pared with  the  Dresden  picture  by  Poorter,  No. 
1390.  It  does  not  at  all  agree  with  the  six  pictures 
of  the  Passion  at  Munich,  put  down  as  early  Rem- 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  85 

brandts,  nor  does  it  agree  with  the  Rembrandts 
in  this  room.  Mentally  cut  ttie  figures  out  of  this 
picture  and  the  Proserpina  (No.  823)  and  you  will 
find  the  remaining  landscapes  will  agree  with  each 
other  fairly  well,  but  they  will  not  agree  with  any 
of  the  other  Rembrandt  backgrounds  in  the  room. 
Cut  the  landscapes  out,  and  the  figures  will  again 
agree  with  each  other  fairly  well  but  not  with  any 
other  of  the  Rembrandt  figures  in  the  room. 

812a.   Samson  and  Delilah.    Probably  by  the  same 

hand  that  did  the  Minerva  (828c)  and  the  Rape 
of  Europa  (N.  N.)  but  done  with  more  spirit.  It 
is  a  pretty  Delilah  with  pretty  hands;  and  the 
yellow  dress  of  Samson  is  pretty  also — too  much 
so  for  Rembrandt.     Formerly  listed  as  a  Lievens. 

828c.   Minerva,     Possibly   the  work  of  the  hand 

that  did  the  Rape  of  Europa.  And  it  is  of  corre- 
sponding quality — or  its  absence.  It  was  once 
ascribed  to  Bol,  but  has  been  promoted  to  the 
Rembrandt  rank  where  it  does  not  belong. 
Thought  to  have  been  painted  about  1631,  and 
hence  an  early  Rembrandt,  but  he  probably  never 
saw  it.  Notice  the  lack  of  strength  in  the  type, 
the  colour,  the  texture  of  the  robe.  Is  this  the 
hand  that  at  this  time  did  the  Lesson  in  Anatomy? 
Frans  Hals  doing  a  picture  in  the  style  of  Van  der 
Werff,  or  Velasquez  painting  a  pretty-faced  Ma- 
donna in  the  smooth  manner  of  Morales  would 
not  be  more  anomalous  than  this  picture  as  a 
Rembrandt. 

808.   Rembrandt's  Portrait.    A  rather  loosely  done 

portrait  of  Rembrandt  in  his  early  or  grey  period. 
The  shadow  of  the  face  is  luminous  but  the  surface 
looks  as  though  it  had  been  gone  over  several  times. 


86  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

The  handling  of  the  hat  and  feather,  the  chain  and 
gorget  are  free.  The  modelling  is  soft  or  pumpkin- 
like. The  work  quite  agrees  with  the  authentic  pic- 
tures of  Jan  Lievens.  Moreover,  there  are  plough- 
ings  or  scratchings  in  the  hair,  done  with  the  wooden 
end  of  the  brush,  which  was  a  peculiar  trick  of 
this  same  Rembrandt  follower — ^Jan  Lievens. 

810.   Rembrandt's   Portrait.     Another  portrait  in 

Rembrandt's  grey  period.  A  somewhat  carelessly 
done  portrait  with  luminous  shadow  and  a  grey 
ground.  The  right  side  of  the  face  and  the  right 
eye  seem  to  be  hurt.  Thought  to  have  been  done 
about  1634.  It  is  not  satisfactory  because  want- 
ing in  sureness  of  touch.  Notice  the  figure  for 
uncertainty  of  form. 

802.    Samson  Threatening  His  Father-in-Law.    This 

is  a  large  but  by  no  means  a  strong  picture.  The 
head  of  Samson  is  well  done  without  being  remark- 
able; the  shadows  are  luminous;  the  total  colour 
effect  is  blue-grey.  The  architecture  of  the  win- 
dow and  the  head  protruding  from  it  are  good 
illustrations  of  commonplace  painting.  See  also 
the  patterning  of  the  dress  which  fails  to  hold  at 
a  distance.  It  is  a  school  piece  at  best  with  an- 
other hand  and  eye  than  Rembrandt's  apparent 
in  its  light,  colour,  and  handling.  The  same  hand 
probably  did  the  Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman  (No. 
812)  in  the  Hermitage,  the  head  of  a  girl  with 
flowers  in  her  hair  in  the  Ridder  Collection,  for- 
merly loaned  to  the  Staedel  Institute,  and  possibly 
the  Proserpine  (No.  823)  in  this  gallery.  It  is 
worth  noting  that  the  Samson  here  has  the  features 
of  the  man  so  often  painted  in  different  costumes 
by  the  Rembrandt  School — the  man  we  call  Rem- 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  87 

brandt.  The  man  was  probably  none  other  than 
a  studio  model  who  had  a  fierce-looking,  rather 
forceful  face  and  was  a  favourite  model  with  all 
the  painters  of  the  school.  Why  should  Rembrandt 
paint  himself  thirty  or  more  times?  And  how  was 
it  possible  for  Rembrandt  or  any  other  painter  to 
see  himself  from  thirty  different  points  of  view  and 
paint  himself  in  thirty  different  ways.  A  genius! 
Yes;  but  genius  is  remarkable  always  for  its  per- 
sistent singleness  of  view  and  method.  It  is  the 
imitator  who  changes  his  view  and  method  from 
time  to  time. 

828d.   The  Money-Changer.     This  picture  is  again 

too  small  and  petty  in  the  surfaces  for  Rembrandt. 
Nor  is  the  illumination  or  colour  or  drawing  his. 
It  is  by  a  later  man. 

828l.    Anslo  the  Mennonite  Preacher.     A  large  pic- 

*  ture  in  Rembrandt's  golden  period,  somewhat  warm 
in  colour  but  wanting  in  keen  artistic  interest  or 
feeling.  It  is  largely  seen  and  painted  with  no 
tricky  little  high  lights  on  hat  brims  or  jewels. 
The  whole  is  simple  and  broad.  Notice  the  table- 
cloth, books,  and  candlestick  for  absence  of  sharp 
high  lights.  Notice  also  the  clarity  of  the  shadows, 
the  drawing  of  the  hands  and  heads,  the  placing  of 
the  figures  in  the  room,  the  depth  and  air  of  the 
room.  This  is  not  inspired  but  it  is  a  genuine 
work  of  a  broad  mind  and  brush  such  as  Rem- 
brandt possessed.  It  agrees  quite  perfectly  with 
the  Lesson  in  Anatomy  and  the  Coppenol  at  Cas- 
sel.  Compare  it  with  the  smaller  examples  here  put 
down  to  him  (Nos.  823,  828c),  and  then  draw  your 
own  inferences.  Its  colour  and  shadow  depths 
should  be  kept  well  in  mind  for  future  reference. 


^8  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

812.    Saskia.     In  Rembrandt's  grey-golden  period. 

It  is  a  little  smooth  in  the  flesh,  the  drawing  of  the 
mouth  is  weak,  the  eyes  are  not  so  well  done  as 
they  might  be,  nor  is  the  dress  any  too  certain  in 
its  high  lights.  The  over-cleaned  hand  still  has 
some  modelling  about  it.  The  lights  on  the  jewels 
are  a  little  spotty  but  very  different  from  those  of 
No.  828  or  828c.  It  was  probably  worked  on  by 
pupils  after  Saskia's  death  in  1642.  It  is  dated 
1643. 

806.   Joseph* s  Dream,     A  sketchy  little  affair,  very 

good  in  colour  and  light,  possibly  by  the  painter 
of  Daniel's  Vision  (828f)  and  Tobias  and  the 
Angel  (No.  828n),  which  see  and  compare.  Cer- 
tainly not  by  Rembrandt. 

828a.    Portrait  of  a  Rabbi,     This  picture  is  dated 

1645,  but  it  would  seem  from  the  handling  to  be- 
long to  a  later  period.  The  flesh  is  apoplectic  and 
much  thumbed,  the  beard  is  worked  over  and 
amended,  the  hands  are  hot  in  colour  and  laboured 
in  their  drawing.  The  shadow  is  still  luminous, 
the  cloak  beautifully  done,  the  chain  not  too 
prominently  painted.  It  is  not  a  good  example  of 
Rembrandt  but,  for  the  present  at  least,  must  be 
accepted  as  by  him. 

828e.   Susanna,     Certainly  a  very  Rembrandtesque 

*  picture.  It  is  rather  fine  in  the  nude  figure  and 
brilliant  in  the  red  robe.  It  might  have  been  done 
by  Rembrandt,  but  the  landscape  and  the  handling 
of  the  high  lights  on  the  robes  point  to  Eeckhout 
or  some  one  of  his  ilk.  There  is  no  certainty  about 
Eeckhout  having  done  it,  though  it  is  probably  by 
the  same  hand  that  did  the  figure  in  the  Louvre 
(No.  2549)  and  the  Woman  Bathing  in  the  National 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  89 

Gallery,  London  (No.  54).  It  is  nearer  to  Eeck- 
hout  than  to  Rembrandt. 

828f.   DanieVs  Vision,     A  picture  of  decided  merit 

in  its  drawing  of  figures,  its  landscape,  its  colour, 
and  its  painting.  But  at  just  what  period  Rem- 
brandt painted  the  pretty  angel  with  the  golden  hair 
remains  something  of  a  mystery.  Where  else  does 
he  show  this  style  or  quality — in  what  picture,  in 
what  gallery?  The  picture  comes  nearer  to  a  good 
example  of  Eeckhout  or  Bol.  See  Bol's  picture  in 
the  Dresden  Gallery  (No.  1604).  The  angel  in  it 
is  in  the  style  of  this  angel.  It  agrees  fairly  well 
with  the  Tobias  and  the  Angel  picture  in  this  gal- 
lery (No.  828n).  Cut  out  the  figures  in  these  two 
pictures  and  notice  how  like  are  the  landscapes. 
Then  notice  that  these  two  landscapes  do  not 
agree  at  all  with  the  two  landscapes  in  the  Europa 
and  the  Proserpina  (Nos.  N.  N.  and  823).  The 
figures  of  the  last  two  disagree  just  as  radically 
with  the  figures  of  the  first  two.  Is  not  this  in 
itself  some  reason  for  thinking  that  there  are  two 
different  hands  at  work  here?  But  the  Rembrandt 
problem  is  not  confined  to  two  men.  The  master 
is  confused  and  confounded  with  a  dozen  or  more 
of  his  pupils,  and  scores  of  the  pupils'  pictures  are 
now  masquerading  under  the  master's  name. 

811a.    Man  with  the  Golden  Helmet.     This  model 

**  is  sometimes  called  Rembrandt's  brother,  but  for 
no  particular  reason  save  that  gallery  directors 
want  fetching  titles  for  their  pictures.  The  same 
model  was  used  by  Bol  and  Flinck.  It  is  a  strong, 
powerfully  done  head  and  helmet,  and  is  doubt- 
less by  Rembrandt,  although  the  light-and-shade 
is  erratic,  and  the  whole  work  is  not  character- 


90  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

istic.  Something  has  happened  to  the  face,  per- 
haps, to  darken  it,  but  over  the  darkened  face 
there  is  still  a  luminous  (not  a  pot-black)  shadow. 
It  is  a  late  picture,  and  heavily  loaded  with  paint, 
as  shown  in  the  helmet.  The  face  is  much  thumbed 
but  very  effective,  very  powerful.  It  is  a  master- 
piece though  apparently  somewhat  injured.  Think 
of  the  man  who  could  do  such  work  as  this  at  any 
time  in  his  career  doing  the  pretty  Rape  of  Europa 
or  the  Proserpina!     But  it  is  unthinkable. 

828.  Jacob  Wrestling  with  the  AngeL  A  poor  pic- 
ture whoever  did  it.  In  its  present  condition  the 
flesh  has  anything  but  a  flesh-like  quality  to  it. 
Rembrandt's  drawing  is  not  apparent  in  the  eyes  or 
brows  of  the  angel  or  in  his  hands  or  legs.  Nor  is 
his  painting  in  the  hair  or  the  red  coat  of  Jacob.  It 
is  unbelievable  as  a  Rembrandt  but  conceivable  as 
a  Bol.  The  same  angel  (the  model)  appears  in 
Bol's  Abraham  Receiving  the  Visit  of  Angels  (No. 
652)  in  the  Rijks  Museum,  Amsterdam.  And  does 
not  this  same  model  appear  again  in  Bol's  Portrait 
of  a  Young  Man  in  this  room  (No.  809a)? 

828h.    Potiphar's  Wife  Accusing  Joseph,     This  is  a 

*  late  picture.  The  background  is  dark  but  not  the 
shadows,  which  are  still  luminous.  The  handling 
is  somewhat  fumbling,  as  though  Rembrandt's  hand 
had  lost  its  cunning.  Notice  the  dresses  and  high 
lights  for  the  lack  of  certainty  in  the  touch.  The 
general  effect,  however,  is  powerful  and  the  colour 
rich.  Probably  painted  in  1655.  Eeckhout  did 
things  of  a  similar  nature,  but  this  seems  too  strong 
for  him. 

828b.    Portrait  of  Hendrickje  Sioffeh.     The   name 

*  of  Hendrickje  Stoffels  is  a  mere  guess.    No  one 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  91 

knows  what  she  or  Rembrandt's  brother  looked 
Hke.  It  is  no  great  matter  in  art  but  is  illustra- 
tive of  the  way  in  which  history  is  manufactured 
from  insufficient  or  wholly  imaginary  bases.  This 
is  an  excellent  picture  but  somewhat  dark  in  the 
shadows  of  the  eyes  and  neck  and  kneaded  in  the 
surfaces  of  the  flesh  and  the  dress.  The  hands  are 
a  little  like  Rembrandt's,  as  also  the  handling  of  the 
high  lights.  The  colour  is  sombre.  In  order  to 
make  the  picture  correspond  with  the  dates  of 
Hendrickje's  life  the  work  is  said  to  have  been 
painted  about  1658.  The  painting  was  formerly 
known  as  A  Young  Woman  at  a  Window,  and  it 
bears  some  indication  in  the  handling  and  light  of 
having  been  done  by  Fabritius. 

811.    Moses   Breaking  the  Tables  of  Stone.     In  its 

present  condition  the  picture  is  not  worth  many 
words.  It  belongs  in  the  class  with  No.  828. 
Rembrandt  may  have  started  both  of  them  and 
abandoned  them  as  failures;  and  perhaps  they 
were  signed  and  sold  after  his  death;  or  perhaps 
he  did  not  even  touch  them.  No  wonder  people 
do  not  care  for  Rembrandt  when  such  pictures  as 
this  are  declared  to  be  from  his  hand. 

811c.    Study  of  the  Head  of  Christ.     A  good,  strong 

head,  freely  done,  but  with  nothing  about  it  strongly 
indicative  of  Rembrandt.  On  the  contrary,  it 
seems  not  at  all  in  his  vein.  This  is  equally  true 
of  No.  828m. 

828m.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Jew.     Sketched  in  well 

but  in  no  Rembrandtesque  manner.  See  the  small 
heads  in  the  Antwerp  Gallery,  Nos.  294  and  295, 
for  similar  work. 


92  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

828n.    Tobias  and  the  Angel.     An  excellent  little 

picture,  probably  by  the  author  of  Daniel's  Vision 
in  this  gallery  (828f).  Compare  the  types,  the 
landscapes,  the  drawing,  the  handling  of  the  two 
pictures.     This  one  was  once  given  to  Flinck. 

828j.    Old  Man  with  a  Red  Cap.      A  Rembrandt- 

*  esque  study.  It  is  dark  brown  in  the  ground, 
luminous  in  the  shadow,  and  rich  in  the  colour. 
The  hands  are  only  roughly  laid  in.  A  powerful 
sketch,  probably  by  Eeckhout,  not  Rembrandt. 
The  same  model  appears  in  the  Eeckhout  of  the 
Amsterdam  Gallery  (No.  877),  the  Woman  Taken 
in  Adultery — the  central  figure  of  the  man  with  the 
white  turban.  Besides,  it  is  precisely  in  Eeckhout's 
style.  See  the  notes  on  the  Rembrandts  at  The 
Hague  and  at  St.  Petersburg. 

405b.  Ribera,  Jusefe  (Lo  Spagnoletto).  St.  Sebas- 
tian. A  beautifully  drawn  figure  in  Ribera's  usual 
scheme  of  light,  with  a  forced  effect  derived  from 
the  contrast  of  the  flesh  and  the  shadow.  But 
strongly  done. 

112c.  Robert!,  Ercole  de'.  John  the  Baptist.  Alto- 
gether out  of  proportion,  hard  and  stringy  in  the 
drawing,  withered  in  the  flesh,  but  morbidly  attrac- 
tive like  all  the  work  of  the  early  Ferrarese.  The 
colour  is  a  strange  harmony.  And  what  an  odd 
landscape!    It  passed  at  one  time  as  a  Mantegna. 

112d.  Madonna  and  Child.  This  is  also  out  of  pro- 
portion like  the  John  the  Baptist  (No.  112c).  The 
Madonna  is  enormous.  But  how  attractive  she 
is  I  And  what  a  strange  blue  robel  If  one  is 
seeking  the  unusual  in  art,  here  it  is.  And  there 
are  power  and  true  feeling  behind  the  oddity  of 
view.    The  picture  was  once  known  as  a  Tura. 


ROSSELLI,  COSMO  93 

112e.   St.  Jerome.    A  large  figure  in  a  cardinal's 

robe,  the  red  high  in  key  and  not  marked  in 
its  shadows.  The  drawing  is  a  little  angular,  the 
hands  a  bit  wooden,  the  colour  without  restraint 
or  modulation.     On  a  gold  ground. 

157.  Romanino,  II  (Girolamo  Romani).  Madonna, 
Child,  and  Saints.  The  eyes  are  small  and  close  to- 
gether, as  in  the  after-Giorgiones  at  Dresden  (No. 
186),  at  Budapest  (No.  145),  the  Giorgiones  in  the 
Uffizi  (Nos.  621,  630),  and  the  Giorgione  school 
piece  of  the  National  Gallery  (No.  1173).  The 
flesh  is  brown,  like  the  Giorgione  Concert  in  the 
Louvre.  The  colouring  is  rich  in  red  and  green, 
but  the  drawing  is  lax.  An  early  example  of  Ro- 
manino following  Giorgione,  or,  at  least,  by  the 
same  painter  that  did  the  Dresden,  Florence,  Lon- 
don, and  Budapest  pictures.  The  mannerism  of 
the  eyes  running  through  all  of  them  is  supported 
by  the  similarity  of  the  workmanship,  the  colour, 
the  conception,  the  spirit. 

L57a.    Beheading    of    John     the    Baptist.     Rather 

brutal  in  subject  as  in  drawing,  but  not  wanting 
in  a  rich  colour  effect.  The  German  soldier  at  the 
right,  with  his  handsome  tunic  and  sleeves,  should 
be  noted. 

155.   Salome.    It  is  assigned  to  Romanino  with  a 

query,  and  is  near  to  him  if  not  directly  by  him. 
Giorgione  imitators  were  numerous  in  Romanino's 
day.  The  picture  has  good  colour.  With  narrow 
eyes,  as  in  No.  157. 

69.  Rosselli,  Cosimo.  Madonna  in  Glory.  A  formal 
composition,  too  evenly  balanced  and  too  methodi- 
cally done  to  be  inspiring.  The  colour  effect  is 
rather  poor.    No.  59a  also  lacks  in  spirit  and  is 


94  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

perfunctory  though  perhaps  better  in  colour  than 
No.  59. 
762.  Rubens,  Peter  Paul.  Coronation  of  the  Ma- 
donna. The  figures  are  short  and  heavy  for  Rubens, 
and  the  notes  of  colour  in  the  flesh  and  robes  are 
not  his.  Notice  the  weakness  of  the  cherubs  at  the 
bottom  with  their  dreadful  little  wings  that  no 
painter  of  the  Rubens  stamp  could  have  perpe- 
trated. At  the  top  the  cherubs  are  even  worse. 
It  is  probably  a  much-repainted  school  piece. 

762a.    Isabella    Brandt.     In    the    painter's    early- 

*  middle  manner,  a  picture  clean,  clear,  and  pure  in 
the  head  and  only  slightly  retouched  elsewhere. 
Rubens  was  at  this  time  (about  1610-15)  quite 
supreme  in  his  command  of  resources.  How  he 
draws!  How  flowingly  and  easily  he  paints!  No- 
tice the  red  shadows  of  the  flesh  which  mark  his 
earlier  work  rather  than  his  later.  The  colour 
here  is  resonant  and  yet  not  loud  or  glaring.  And 
what  quiet  dignity  in  the  final  result!  The  panel 
has  been  somewhat  enlarged  from  its  original  form, 
which  may  account  for  the  slurred  fur  at  the  right. 

762b.    Conversion  of    Paul.     A  large  canvas  with 

much  fine  colour  and  headlong  action.  The  shad- 
ows are  a  little  dark.  Notice  the  piling  up  of  the 
figures  diagonally  on  the  canvas  to  give  the  effect 
of  motion.  Designed  by  Rubens  but  probably 
much  painted  upon  by  pupils.  In  other  words,  it 
is  largely  a  workshop  affair. 

762c.    Diana    with    Nymphs    Surprised    by   Satyrs, 

It  belongs  to  the  late  period  of  Rubens.  The  fig- 
ures are  heavy  and  lumpy  and  the  colour  is  brown- 
ish in  the  flesh  shadows.  It  is  suggestive  of  mas- 
sive form  and  powerful  modelling,  but  was  probably 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  95 

never  entirely  completed.  There  is  a  lack  of  finish 
in  the  satyr  at  the  left,  and  also  in  the  background 
at  the  right,  compared  with  Diana  herself.  Some- 
what injured  and  repainted,  as  notice,  for  example, 
the  right  hand  and  wrist  of  Diana. 

763a.    The  Repentant  Magdalen,     It  belongs  to  the 

late  time  of  Rubens  and  is  now  injured  by  repaint- 
ing in  the  figures,  the  landscape,  and  the  sky.  No- 
tice the  bad  condition  of  the  child's  head  at  the 
right  of  the  Magdalen  or  the  profile  of  the  angel. 
It  is  not  a  very  spirited  performance  at  the  pres- 
ent moment  and  was  probably  never  more  than  a 
school  piece. 

763b.   Venus    and   Adonis.    An    early    work    and 

much  cleaned  but  not  noticeably  repainted.  For 
all  the  flaying  of  the  surface  there  still  remain 
some  good  drawing  and  colour.  Notice  the  red 
shadows  in  the  flesh-notes.  Not  a  Rubens  master- 
piece but  a  bright  picture  which  some  critics  de- 
clare to  be  a  school  copy.  It  was  probably  done 
by  pupils  of  Rubens.  A  better  version  is  in  the 
Hermitage  (No.  549).     See  the  note  upon  it. 

774.   Diana  Hunting.    The  animals  are  said  to  be 

by  Snyders,  the  landscape  by  Wildens,  and  the 
figures  by  Rubens.  The  last  allegation  is  question- 
able, and  the  whole  picture,  Kke  so  many  collabora- 
tions in  paint,  is  dull  and  heavy. 

776a.    Neptune  and  Amphitrite.     This  picture  has 

not  the  Rubens  quality  in  drawing,  flesh  colour,  or 
handling.  Notice  the  hard  drawing  in  the  face  of 
Amphitrite,  also  in  the  Neptune  and  Cupid,  and 
notice  also  the  cheap  painting  in  the  hair  of  the 
nymph  at  the  right,  in  the  Amphitrite,  and  in  the 
beard  of  Neptune.    Compare  them  with  the  hair 


96  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

in  No.  783  or  762a,  or  even  776b,  and  the  difference 
will  be  apparent  at  once.  The  picture  has  not  a 
good  piece  of  brush-work  in  it  and  is  altogether  a 
perfunctory  affair,  worthy,  perhaps,  of  some  imi- 
tator or  assistant  but  not  of  Rubens  himself.  It 
looks  like  a  copy  of  some  sort,  being  too  crude  for 
even  a  school  piece. 

776b.   Bacchanal.    According  to  the  catalogue,  this 

picture  belongs  to  Rubens^s  middle  period  and  was 
worked  upon  by  Van  Dyck.  It  is  not  a  brilliant 
performance  but  has  some  good  movement  and 
enough  good  workmanship  about  it  to  make  the 
picture  on  the  opposite  wall  (No.  776a)  look  washed 
out  and  thin.  Compare  the  handling  in  the  hair, 
for  instance,  in  the  two  pictures.  The  figure  of  the 
nude  woman  is  very  good.  The  picture  is  stained  in 
spots  and  hurt  by  repainting — enough  so  to  give 
a  generally  messy  look  to  the  surface.  But  it  has 
colour  and  life  to  it  still.  An  earlier  version  in  the 
Munich  Gallery  (No.  754). 

776c.   Andromeda.    A  large  and  fine  nude  in  the 

*  late  style  of  Rubens,  with  very  positive  truth  of 
form,  bulk,  and  weight.  And  what  large  grace 
from  head  to  foot  there  is  about  this  generalised 
figure  of  Helene  Fourment!  The  flesh  colour  is  less 
clear  than  in  Rubens's  early  works  and  the  shadows 
are  brownish,  though  perhaps  some  of  this  lack  of 
clearness  is  due  to  staining  and  retouching.  The 
background  is  merely  brushed  in  but  has  a  fine 
suggestion  of  the  sea  under  a  golden  glow  of  sunset. 

776p.    Portrait  of  Jean  van  Ghindertalen,     A  rather 

good  profile,  done  easily,  perhaps  hastily,  but  effec- 
tively. You  feel  the  head,  the  brows,  the  sharp 
nose,  the  thin  hair,  the  coarse  beard. 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  97 

St.  Cecilia,    The  picture  is  still  excellent  in 

body  as  in  spirit,  and  the  robes  have  colour  charm 
left  though  the  surface  has  been  much  hurt  and  is 
sadly  repainted.  Look  at  the  thumbed  and  daubed 
surfaces  around  St.  Cecilia's  head,  about  the  cherub 
at  the  top,  the  one  below,  and  the  two  at  the  left 
centre.  The  hair  of  the  saint  seems  hurt  by  bi- 
tumen, as  also  her  robe.  The  picture  comes  peri- 
lously near  being  a  beautiful  wreck,  but  it  is  still 
"beautiful."  A  late  Rubens  and  originally  a  very 
fine  one. 

The   Raising  of  Lazarus,     At  one  time  this 


picture  was  arched  at  the  top  and  the  figures 
were  arranged  to  repeat  and  complement  the  arch. 
The  lines  may  still  be  seen  at  the  top  of  the  can- 
vas. The  figure  of  Christ  is  majestic  and  the  two 
sisters  kneeUng  are  magnificently  graceful.  How 
right  the  drawing!  Look  at  the  arms,  hands,  feet. 
Notice  the  fine  colour  in  the  robes  of  the  sisters. 
Painted  in  Rubens's  earlier  period,  and  possibly 
with  the  help  of  Van  Dyck  in  the  figures  at  the 
back,  but  for  the  main  part  it  is  by  Rubens's  own 
hand.  Somewhat  repainted  but  still  a  very  fine 
picture,  with  much  clarity  and  brilliancy  showing 
in  it. 

-Perseus  and  Andromeda,     A  peculiarly  Flem- 


ish conception,  ample  in  the  proportions  of  the 
man,  the  horse,  the  cupids,  the  blushing  lady.  It 
may  be  questioned  if  Rubens  himself  did  not  think 
it  a  bit  grotesque,  a  trifle  too  lumpy.  It  has  been 
hurt  across  the  face  of  Perseus  and  elsewhere  and 
was  never  quite  completed.  One  sometimes  won- 
ders if  Rubens  was  responsible  for  it,  but  his  un- 
derbasing,  high  lights,  and  handling  still  show  in  it. 


98  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

798h.   St.  Sebastian,    Stand  across  the  room  and 

*  notice  the  glow  of  the  flesh  and  the  superb  model- 
ling of  the  chest  and  torso.  This  deep  flesh  glow 
should  be  compared  with  the  surface  gleam  of 
the  Neptune,  No.  776a,  to  show  how  far  removed 
from  Rubens  is  the  latter  work.  Somewhat  hurt 
but  still  a  powerful  figure.  The  landscape  has 
breadth  about  it  and  is  not  spotty  with  small  high 
lights  like  so  many  of  the  alleged  Rubens  landscapes. 

885.  Ruisdael,  Jacob  van.  Landscape,  This  is  the 
stereotyped  Ruisdael  landscape,  and  yet  it  has  a 
good  realistic  effect  in  the  hillside  and  the  small 
farm  at  its  foot.  See  his  smaller  and  better  pic- 
tures, Nos.  885e,  885h,  and  885j. 

885g.   Eichenwald,     A  very  large  and  exceptionally 

*  good  example  of  Ruisdael.  Here  his  landscape 
formula  shows  at  its  best  and  possesses  not  only 
style  but  some  grandeur.  There  is  an  attempt  at 
realism  in  the  pond  of  the  foreground,  and  in  the 
white  tree;  but  the  full  statement  of  Ruisdael's 
convention  did  not  admit  of  too  much  realism. 
The  colour  is  grey  with  a  fine  sky.    A  noble  work. 

884b.  Landscape  with  Ruins  of  a  Cloister,  Evi- 
dently done  with  at  least  one  eye  on  nature— on  an 
actual  scene — but  warped  by  the  painter's  posses- 
sion of  a  formula  for  doing  landscape,  a  conven- 
tion which  he  could  not  forget.  Hence  the  dull 
light,  the  grey  sky,  water,  and  all  that,  which  were 
not  and  are  not  generally  true  of  Holland  or  any 
other  country  under  the  sun. 

901c.    Ruysdael,  Salomon    van.     Dutch   Landscape, 

A  rather  fine,  diagonally  composed  landscape  with 
a  good  sky  and  agreeable  colour.   This  is  Ruysdael 


SASSETTA  (STEFANO  DI  GIOVANNI)  99 

following  Van  Goyen  and  at  his  best.  In  fact,  it 
is  so  good  one  wonders  if  it  is  a  Salomon  van  Ruys- 
dael  at  all. 

J40.  SartO,  Andrea  del.  Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman. 
It  is  a  study  or  sketch,  probably  of  Andrea's  wife 
Lucrezia,  and  has  some  spirit  about  it  without 
being  otherwise  remarkable. 

J46.    Madonna  and  Child  Enthroned,  with  Saints. 

*  A  large  altar-piece  that  is  of  the  earth  earthy,  so 
far  as  any  religious  sentiment  is  concerned.  The 
types  are  heavy,  even  that  of  the  Madonna — a 
conventionalised  Lucrezia  Fede.  Everywhere  the 
saints  are  unsaintly,  material,  almost  gross.  But 
as  composition,  as  light-and-shade,  as  glowing  col- 
our, what  more  could  you  ask?  Originally  it  must 
have  been  a  fine  piece  of  drawing  and  colour,  and 
is  so  yet,  though  the  surface  has  been  much  re- 
stored and  repainted. 

63b.  Sassetta  (Stefano  di  Giovanni).  Madonna 
and  Child.  By  a  painter  possessed  of  the  Sienese 
religious  sentiment  to  an  extent  that  rather  warps 
his  faces  and  figures  from  the  natural.  Notice  the 
graceful  little  angels  with  the  crown,  the  elongated 
Child,  and  the  Madonna  so  very  tender  in  feeling. 
The  sentiment  is  very  refined  and  even  the  work- 
manship is  full  of  f.eeling. 

63c.    Madonna  and  Child  with  Two  Saints.     It  is 

done  in  a  different  style  and  manner  from  No.  62b. 
The  figures  are  angular,  badly  drawn,  but  with 
some  pathos  and  fineness  of  feeling. 

63d.   Mass  of  St.  Francis.     The  picture  is  beautiful 

even  in  its  regularity  and  primness.  The  spirit  is 
unusual  in  its  intentness  and  the  style  is  simplicity 
itself.     Notice  the  charming  doing  of  the  window 


100  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

above  St.  Francis  and  the  passage  at  the  right. 
The  drawing  of  the  altar  is  a  little  askew,  but  the 
whole  setting  of  the  interior  of  the  church  is  con- 
vincing, true,  and  delightful  in  its  feeling. 

307.    Savoldo,    Girolamo.     A    Venetian    Woman, 

It  is  not  unlike  No.  1031  in  the  National  Gallery, 
London,  only  here  the  sheeny  cloak  is  golden-brown 
instead  of  silver.  The  texture  of  the  cloak  evi- 
dently pleased  the  painter  more  than  the  figure 
within  it.     It  is  a  superficial  effect. 

307a.    Mourning   the  Dead   Christ.     The   painter's 

mannerisms  (as,  for  instance,  the  painting  of  the 
Magdalen's  dress)  rather  weaken  the  general  effect, 
but  it  is  a  dignified  attempt  to  do  something  large 
and  not  an  altogether  unsuccessful  one.  The  col- 
our has  been  darkened  by  age  but  was  originally 
deep-toned. 

1234b.  Schaffner,  Martin.  Two  Altar-Wings,  Shown 
*  on  both  sides  in  four  panels.  The  subjects  are 
Sts.  Luke,  Andrew,  Mark,  and  Gregory.  They  are 
all  of  them  substantial,  well-drawn  figures  in  orna- 
mental robes.  Gold  work  at  the  back.  The  four 
panels  make  a  rich  effect  and  have  a  good  deal  of 
force  about  them  as  decoration. 

1162.    Schiavone,  Gregorio.     Madonna  Enthroned.     A 

picture  that  shows  decided  Paduan  influence  and 
teaching  in  the  sky,  the  angels,  the  Madonna,  the 
stone  chair.  Highly  decorative  in  colour,  in  gold 
work,  in  the  architecture,  grapes,  beads.  Odd, 
almost  grotesque  in  types,  it  nevertheless  possesses 
strength  and  individuality. 

1629.    Schongauer,   Martin.      Adoration  of  the   Kings. 

With  bright,  clear  colour  and  drawing  that  matches 


SIENESE'SCHOOL  101 

it  in  clearness.  In  connection  with  the  side  pieces, 
Nos.  1629a,  1629b  (of  poorer  work  but  probably  a 
part  of  the  same  altar-piece),  it  makes  a  brilliant 
spot  on  the  wall.  There  are  figures  on  the  reverse 
of  the  wings.  Not  to  be  accepted  as  entirely  rep- 
resentative of  Schongauer,  who  was  a  man  of  much 
strength. 

644a.  Scorel,  Jan  van.  Madonna  and  Child.  An  at- 
tractive, winning  Madonna  and  Child  but  not  a 
representative  example  of  Scorel,  who  was  a 
draughtsman  of  force  and  power.  The  flowers  in 
the  hand  are  worth  looking  at  and  the  colour  has 
music  in  it  in  connection  with  those  far  hills.  No. 
153  is  even  less  representative  of  Scorel. 

808a.  Seghers,  Hercules.  Holland  Landscape,  With 
the  thunder-cloud  of  Seghers  in  the  centre — his 
usual  earmark.  An  excellent  landscape  by  a 
painter  whose  work  has  passed  and  still  passes  in 
certain  galleries  and  auction  rooms  under  the  name 
of  Rembrandt. 

806b.   Holland  Landscape.     A  flat  country  with  a 

wide  sky.  There  is  no  thunder-cloud  in  the  sky 
this  time.     A  nice  piece  of  colour,  light,  and  air. 

1132  1  Sellajo,  JacopO  del.      The  Death  of  Julius  Ccesar. 

1133  /  These  two  panels  are  remarkable  pieces  of  colour- 

ing as  well  as  costuming.  Notice  the  ornate  qual- 
ity of  the  robes  and  their  decorative  effect. 

1142.  Sienese  School.  The  Annunciation.  It  is  sim- 
ilar in  types  to  the  large  Simone  Martini  and  Lippo 
Memmi  in  the  Uffizi  (No.  23).  It  belongs  in  the 
same  school  with  the  Uffizi  picture  but  is  probably 
not  by  the  same  hand. 


102  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

79a.  Signorelli,  Luca.  Pan.  A  very  important  pic- 
**  ture,  and  painted  for  Lorenzo  de'  Medici,  perhaps, 
as  the  catalogue  suggests.  It  is  not  now  at- 
tractive in  colour.  It  is  harsh  and  hot  and  the 
draperies  are  leathery  in  texture.  The  shadows 
are  cut  sharp  against  the  lights  on  arms  and  legs, 
giving  the  effect  of  square-block  modelling,  and  the 
outlines  are  black-rimmed.  The  female  figure  at 
the  left  has  large  grace  about  it  and  the  seated 
figure  at  back  some  sentiment  with  much  beauty 
of  form  and  drapery.  But  power  is  the  quality 
most  apparent.  The  figures  of  the  men  are  strong, 
bronze-like  types  full  of  a  large  feeling  for  line  and 
linear  drawing,  full  of  power.  The  classic-pastoral 
spirit  of  it  may  be  interpreted  in  various  ways.  The 
picture  has  probably  been  hurt  or  stained.  An 
early  work.  For  Signorelli's  softer  mood  see  the 
female  figures  in  No.  79. 

79.    St.  Catherine  and  the  Magdalen.     Two  panels 

or  altar  wings  belonging  to  the  late  period  of  the 
master.  There  is  more  sentiment  than  in  No.  79a, 
but  the  drawing  is  less  sure,  less  positive,  though  by 
no  means  lacking  or  insufficient.  The  draperies 
are  angular  and  hard  and  the  faces  and  hands  are 
sharply  outlined.  The  colour  in  the  floor  is  varie- 
gated as  in  the  London  National  Gallery  picture 
(No.  1128).  The  Magdalen  is  the  better  figure 
and  very  fine  in  colour.  The  figure  back  of  her 
is  effective  in  the  white  head-dress.  The  second 
altar  wing  contains  a  fine  figure  of  St.  Catherine, 
charming  in  sentiment,  beautifully  drawn  in  the 
draperies,  and  good  in  colour. 

79c.    Portrait    of  an   Old  Man.      Done   in   Signo- 

*     relli's  usual  dry,  hard,  leathery  style,  but  with  ex- 


SPANISH  SCHOOL  103 

cellent  line  drawing,  strong  characterisation,  and 
forceful  truth.  What  a  jaw  and  chin!  What  a 
drawing  of  eyes  and  nose  and  face  outline!  The 
head  is  comparable  to  the  Mantegna  (No.  9)  but 
is  not  so  easily  done,  perhaps,  nor  so  clever  in  the 
use  of  reds  and  whites.  The  figures  and  architec- 
ture at  the  back  were  put  in  to  fill  space  or  suggest 
the  sitter's  calling  in  life. 

79b.   Visitation.    Notice  the  filling  of  the  circular 

space  with  colour  and  figures.  The  types  are 
rather  harsh  and  the  colour  a  little  hot,  but  the 
Madonna  is  nice  in  feeling  and  the  two  men  have 
a  rugged  strength.  Even  in  so  small  a  subject 
and  so  gentle  a  theme  Signorelli  shows  himself  a 
draughtsman  of  power. 

1070a.  Simone  Martini.  Entombment.  It  has  fine 
dramatic  quality  in  the  figures  and  clear,  pure  col- 
our. The  background,  painted  in  long  after  the 
figures,  perhaps,  has  changed  in  colour.  Other  por- 
tions of  this  altar-piece  at  the  Louvre  (No.  1383) 
and  Antwerp  (Nos.  257-260)  have  gold  back- 
grounds.    Notice  the  patterns  of  the  haloes. 

109.  Sodoma,  II  (Giovanni  Antonio  Bazzi).  Char^ 
ity.  A  large  and  somewhat  exaggerated  figure  not 
lacking  so  much  in  grace  as  in  force.  The  children 
are  interesting.  The  landscape  is  a  little  matter- 
of-fact  and  commonplace. 

225.  Solario,  Andrea.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  The  eyes 
are  placed  somewhat  askew,  but  it  is  a  rather  good 
portrait,  being  coarsely  reminiscent  of  Antonello 
da  Messina. 

408c.  Spanisli  School.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  A  good 
portrait,  whoever  its  author,  but  not  of  that  vital 


104  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

quality  or  spirit  that  makes  it  great  art.  Once 
put  down  to  Velasquez  but  it  is  too  superficial  and 
glittering  for  him.  [Changed  (1914)  to  the  Flem- 
ish School.] 

27a.    Squarcione,  Francesco.     Madonna  and  Child, 

*  This  picture  and  a  school  piece  at  Padua  are  the 
only  pictures  that  can  be  traced  to  the  master  of 
Mantegna  and  the  founder  of  the  Paduan  School. 
This  Berlin  panel  shows  the  influence  of  Dona- 
tello's  bas-reliefs  rather  than  that  study  of  the 
antique  which  has  heretofore  been  put  down  as 
Squarcione's  controlling  influence.  It  is  likely  that 
Mantegna,  too,  received  some  of  Donatello's  influ- 
ence, possibly  through  Squarcione.  This  picture 
shows  a  hard,  medallion-like  profile  of  the  Madonna 
with  a  beautiful  halo  about  the  head.  The  pattern 
of  fruit  was  afterward  adopted  by  many  painters, 
as  were  also  the  flaky  sky  and  the  parapet.  The 
colour  is  excellent.  A  notable  picture  that  is  now 
somewhat  hurt. 

795b.  Steen,  Jan.  The  Quarrel.  Done  in  a  large, 
broad  way,  well  drawn  and  freely  painted,  but 
blackish  in  the  shadows.  The  still -life  on  the 
table  and  floor,  the  head,  arm,  and  right  hand  of  the 
man  in  blue  are  notable.  Steen  was  a  painter, 
whether  you  like  his  themes  or  not.  See  also  No. 
795. 

795d.   The  Baptism.     A  large  Steen  fairly  good  in 

its  interior  setting.  The  planes  of  the  picture  are 
well  maintained  and  the  colour  values  are  quite 
true.  The  subject  is  not  more  interesting  than 
Steen's  usual  themes,  the  colour  effect  is  a  little 
deeper,  the  shadows  a  little  darker,  and  the  light 
rather  harsh  and  cold. 


TERBORCH,  GERARD  105 

795c.  Gay  Company.  In  Steen's  free  manner,  per- 
haps a  bit  careless  in  its  doing,  but  full  of  spirit, 
good  painting,  and  excellent  colour. 

1006.  Stoop,  Dirck.  Hunting-Dogs.  A  small  picture 
which  should  not  be  passed  unnoticed.  It  is  well 
drawn  and  good  in  colour. 

583a.  Strigel,  Bernhard.  St.  Norbert.  With  rich- 
ness in  the  red  and  an  old-ivory  hue  in  the  white. 
Very  beautifully  done  in  the  robes,  with  figures 
that  stand  well.  At  the  back  a  green-blue  land- 
scape. 

1673.    Swabian    School.     The    Trinity.    Odd    in    the 

drawing  of  the  throne,  but  what  wonderful  detail 
in  it!  Also  what  colour  in  the  robes  of  the  Father 
and  the  Son!  The  gold  ground  is  very  brilliant. 
The  red  and  green  robes  of  the  women  at  right  are 
a  little  out  of  tone. 

791.  Terborch,  Gerard.  Paternal  Advice.  The  silver 
*  of  the  satin  is  foremost  in  evidence  as  in  all  Ter- 
borch's  costume  pictures.  There  are  good  drawing, 
colour,  and  texture  painting  all  through,  except 
at  the  back  of  the  young  lady's  head  where  there 
has  been  some  repainting,  perhaps.  The  back- 
ground is  lost  in  gloom.  Another  version  in  the 
Amsterdam  Gallery  (No.  570). 

791a  1  Portraits  of  Man  and   Wife.     Both  pictures 

791b  J  are  a  trifle  hard  and  glassy  in  surfaces,  but  these 
are  straightforward  people  done  in  a  simple,  direct 
way.  They  are  a  little  painted-to-order,  perhaps, 
but  still  where  shall  we  see  finer  types  among  Ter- 
borch's  contemporaries? 

791d.  — — Portrait  of  a  Man.  Once,  perhaps,  a  noble 
portrait  but  now  stained  and  hurt.     There  is  still 


106  KA.ISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

good  colour — in  the  table-cloth,  for  instance,  or  in 
the  chair. 

791e.   Portrait  of  a  Man,     Hurt  by  the  blistering  of 

the  robes  and  the  staining  of  the  table-cloth.  What 
dignity  and  carriage  in  the  figure!  Terborch  in 
small  portraits  is  quite  unexcelled,  though  these 
are  not  the  best  examples  of  them. 

791 F.   The   Smoker,     Not   particularly   interesting 

*  in  subject  but  very  well  painted.  It  is  largely  seen 
and  handled.  Notice  the  doing  of  the  face,  hair, 
and  cap,  the  heavy  hands  and  the  soiled  sleeves. 
This  is  drawing  and  painting  of  an  impeccable  kind. 
It  could  hardly  be  improved  upon. 

791 G.  The  Concert,  The  figure  at  the  back  play- 
ing the  spinet  is  unhappily  placed  because  the 
spinet  cuts  away  the  figure  and  creates  the  impres- 
sion of  a  coloured  terra-cotta  bust  in  the  corner  of 
the  room.  In  subordinating  this  second  figure 
to  the  foreground  figure  the  painter  lost  its  value. 
The  picture  wants  in  the  feeling  of  space.  The 
dress  of  the  chief  figure  is  good  in  texture  though 
the  waist  has  no  body  in  it.  The  head,  neck,  and 
shoulders  are  rather  fine. 

791h.    Young  People  Drinking   Wine.      The  colour 

is  slate-grey,  the  background  flat.  The  picture  has 
been  repainted  in  the  faces,  hands,  and  elsewhere. 
Not  the  best  Terborch  in  the  gallery  though  it  has 
some  colour  and  good  textures  in  that  familiar 
satin  gown. 
N.  N.  Tiepolo,  Giovanni,  Battista.  The  Tiepolo  Room* 
A  room  with  frescoes  in  grey  and  white  on  golden- 
yellow  grounds.  It  should  be  studied  not  only 
for  its  fine  decorative  quality  but  also  for  the  life 
and  movement  of  the  figures. 


TINTORETTO,  JACOPO  107 

459b.  Martyrdom  of  St.  Agatha.  This  was  orig- 
inally painted  for  church  decoration  rather  than 
for  gallery  exhibition,  and  it  suffers  by  its  light 
scheme  of  colour  being  brought  into  contrast  with 
the  other  pictures  in  the  room.  Easily  and  freely 
handled,  with  a  staccato  edge  to  the  draperies  not 
altogether  pleasant. 

459c.    Bearing  the  Cross.     A  sketch  for  the  original 

*  picture  in  S.  Alvise,  Venice,  and  most  interesting  in 
its  freedom  of  handling.  The  verve  of  the  artist  is 
in  this  first  impression.  Notice  the  bent  figures 
at  the  left,  the  fainting  figure  of  the  Christ,  the 
plunging  horse.  Notice  also  the  fine  colour  and 
the  serene  sky.     It  is  masterful. 

298.  Tintoretto,   Jacopo   (Robusti).    Portrait  of  a 

*  Procurator  of  St.  Mark.  A  dignified  character  in 
rich  robes,  painted  with  perhaps  a  trifle  too  much 
emphasis  in  the  high  lights,  but  otherwise  a  ster- 
ling performance.  It  has  darkened  by  time  and 
been  hurt  in  spots  by  restoration. 

298a.    Annunciation,     It  is  hung  too  high  (1912)  to 

judge  of  its  condition  or  its  painter,  but  it  can  be 
seen  so  far  as  its  general  conception  goes.  This  lat- 
ter is  not  remarkable.  Tintoretto  painted  the  sub- 
ject more  elaborately  and  better  in  the  Scuola  S. 
Rocco  at  Venice.  Besides,  the  spirit  here  is  a  Uttle 
affected.  The  angel  and  the  Madonna  are  both  too 
conscious.  Evidently  somewhat  repainted.  Attri- 
bution questionable. 

299.    Portrait  of  a  Procurator  of  Si,  Mark.     It  is, 

perhaps,  the  same  sitter  as  shown  in  No.  298b,  but 
painted  at  a  different  age.  No.  299  is  a  little  vivid 
in  its  red  robe,  and  has  been  somewhat  repainted, 
but  is  nevertheless  a  powerful  head.     The  land- 


♦ 


108  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

scape  at  the  right  is  perhaps  hot  but  effective. 
Tintoretto  does  not  always  show  to  such  good  ad- 
vantage as  a  portrait  painter  as  in  this  picture. 

300.    Madonna  and  Child  with  Sts.  Mark  and  Luke, 

It  is  cold  in  colour  but  there  is  much  grace  about 
the  Madonna  and  Child  bending  forward.  Com- 
posed as  an  oval  of  figures  on  an  upright  panel.  A 
late  picture  and  possibly  worked  on  by  pupils. 

310.   Luna  and  the  Hours,    This  is  a  picture  that 

**  gives  some  hint  of  Tintoretto's  imagination.  What 
splendid  heads,  figures,  arms,  robes,  draperies! 
Notice  the  Michelangelesque  quality  in  the  head, 
bust,  and  arms  of  the  driver  of  the  car.  The  drap- 
eries pushed  back  by  the  wind  and  the  tightened 
chains  (though  there  are  no  horses  apparent)  give 
the  feeling  of  sweeping  through  space.  Diana,  the 
moon  goddess,  by  the  fling  back  of  her  figure,  gives 
the  further  feehng  of  flight.  The  surface  does  not 
look  much  like  Tintoretto's  work,  though  cleaning 
or  retouching  may  have  produced  its  smoothness. 
A  fine  composition  and  a  splendid  harmony  of  col- 
our. 

316.    Venetian  Procurators.     With  a  view  across  the 

Venetian  lagoons  at  back.  The  St.  Mark  is  fairly 
good.  The  picture  has  been  damaged  and  besides 
one  may  entertain  doubts  about  Tintorreto's  hand 
in  it. 

160a.  Titian  (Tiziano  Vecellio).  Portrait  of  a  Daugh- 
*  ter  of  Roberto  Strozzi,  Unfortunately  this  charm- 
ing portrait  has  been  over-cleaned  and  repainted  in 
the  hand,  arm,  and  face.  The  white  dress  is  ap- 
parently stained  in  the  centre,  from  the  girdle  down, 
or  at  least  changed  in  value.  Originally  a  beauti- 
ful picture^"  wonderful, "  Vasari  calls  it — though 


TITIAN  (TIZIANO  VECELLIO)  109 

perhaps  too  much  composed  and  not  quite  simple 
or  direct  enough.  It  is  about  the  only  child's  por- 
trait that  Titian  painted,  and  has  been  much 
praised  by  Aretino  and  others.  The  red  of  the 
robe,  the  blue  of  the  sky,  the  bas-relief,  the  land- 
scape are  still  fine  in  colour.  The  chain  about  the 
waist  and  hanging  down  the  dress  is  now  more 
convincing  than  the  pearls;  but  the  whole  surface 
has  been  injured  by  cleaning. 

Portrait  of  Admiral  Giovanni  Mora,     A  large, 

powerful  head  with  a  massive  brow.  The  armour 
glitters  too  much  and  the  figure  protrudes  too  much 
for  Titian.  A  commanding  personahty  and  a  very 
good  portrait,  however.  Ascribed  by  Berenson  to 
Dossi. 

Portrait  of  the  Painter,     It  was  never  quite 

finished  by  the  painter,  though  he  carried  the  head 
as  far  as  he  thought  best,  no  doubt.  It  has  vigour 
and  hfe  about  it,  though  haste  is  apparent  in  the 
hands,  the  dress,  the  high  lights.  Look  at  it  from 
across  the  gallery  and  notice  how  firm  it  is  and  how 
well  it  carries.  What  a  poise  it  has,  what  a  set-in, 
what  atmosphere!  Titian  up  to  the  last  could  see 
and  paint  the  large  and  essential  truths — the  uni- 
versal truths.  Therein  lay  the  larger  part  of  his 
greatness.  He  shows  this  grasp  of  the  large  and 
the  universal  even  better  in  the  later  portrait  of 
himself  at  Madrid. 

Titian*8  Daughter,  Lavinia.     A  very  popular 

picture,  much  copied,  engraved,  and  photographed, 
but  never  very  strong  and  always  rather  sweet. 
It  is  probably  an  idealised  portrait  of  Titian's 
daughter  and  prettified  in  process.  In  its  present 
condition  it  is  hurt  by  cleaning  and  retouching  but 


110  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

still  has  some  fine  colour  about  it.  The  head,  neck, 
and  shoulder  are  excellent,  as  also  the  fruit  and 
landscape.  There  are  several  variations  of  the 
same  subject,  the  one  at  Madrid  being  the  most 
notable,  perhaps. 

301.    Portrait  of  a   Young  Man,     The  head  might 

pass  muster  as  a  Titian,  for  it  is  not  badly  done 
though  somewhat  repainted;  but  what  shall  we 
«ay  about  the  figure?  The  body  is  flat,  formless, 
almost  diaphanous,  and  the  head  does  not  fit  it 
or  belong  to  it  except  by  a  stretch  of  the  imagina- 
tion. Could  or  did  Titian  do  such  a  body?  Or 
has  the  whole  picture,  p^erhaps,  been  restored  to 
death  instead  of  to  life?  Formerly  attributed  to 
Tintoretto — a  guess  that  is  not  so  near  the  mark  as 
Titian. 

111.  Tura,  Gosimo.  Madonna  and  Child  Enthroned, 
**  with  Four  Saints,  A  large  and  perhaps  the  most 
important  example  of  Tura  in  existence.  It  is 
somewhat  disturbing  at  first  because  of  the  many 
small  objects  that  enter  into  the  composition. 
The  enthroned  Madonna  is  the  central  figure  to 
which  the  four  saints  pay  a  nominal  allegiance,  but 
the  smaller  objects  in  and  about  the  throne  worry 
the  eye  with  their  insubordination.  Moreover,  the 
figures  at  the  sides,  in  the  lunettes,  the  landscape 
under  the  throne,  the  lion,  the  eagle,  and  all  that 
do  not  help  the  unity  of  the  picture,  however  in- 
teresting they  may  be  as  decorative  morsels.  Aside 
from  this  distracting  feature,  the  detail,  by  itself 
considered,  is  really  wonderful,  especially  in  the 
architecture,  the  throne,  the  bas-reliefs,  the  cos- 
tumes, the  landscape.  Notice  that  the  minutiae  are 
carried  so  far  as  the  placing  of  a  city  in  the  crystal 


VELASQUEZ,  DIEGO  DE  SILVA  Y  111 

held  by  the  eagle's  claw.  The  drawing  is  severe, 
the  draperies  angular,  liny  as  though  studied  from 
wet  linen,  or  falling  in  regular  patterns  or  repeated 
lines,  and  the  figures  are  not  select  but  ill-propor- 
tioned, knotty  in  the  joints.  The  whole  work,  how- 
ever, is  full  of  great  truth  and  sincerity.  The 
colour  is  without  charm,  but  it  has  a  strong  and 
pure  decorative  quality,  even  in  its  harshness,  that 
seems  effectively  to  supplement  the  savage  drawing. 
There  is  a  touch  of  love  and  sweetness  here  and 
there  as  in  the  little  angels  at  the  top.  Somewhat 
hurt  in  the  faces.  The  flesh  colour  has  gone  brown, 
but  the  total  effect  of  colour  with  the  gold  mosaic 
work  at  the  back  is  still  highly  decorative.  A  fine 
altar-piece. 

1170b.   St.   Sebastian,      A  picture   in  Tura's   style 

with  insistent  drawing  and  prominent  joints.  The 
figure  is  hard  and  almost  grotesque.  The  gold 
ground  is  disturbing  in  its  brightness. 

1170c.   St.  Christopher.    A  companion  piece  to  1170b 

with  a  similarly  drawn  figure  and  drapery  that  is 
cast  in  waves.  At  the  bottom  an  excellent  study 
of  the  sea.  A  picture  of  force  not  only  in  drawing 
but  in  the  note  of  blue. 

1635.  Ugolino  da  Siena.  Peter,  Paul,  and  John  the 
Baptist.  A  large  and  rather  important  altar-piece, 
to  be  looked  at  as  a  whole  for  its  fine  decorative 
quality  in  the  gilding,  the  tooling,  the  colours.  No- 
tice the  angels  over  the  pointed  panels  and  above 
them  the  small  heads  in  the  crosspiece.  See  also 
Nos.  1635a  and  1635b. 
413c.  Velasquez,  Diego  de  Silva  y.  Mariana,  Sister 
of  Philip  IV.  It  is  by  no  means  a  mediocre  por- 
trait though  it  has  not  the  touch  of  Velasquez. 


112  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

The  curtain  is  hardly  his  in  colour  or  handling,  nor 
the  handkerchief,  nor  the  ruff,  nor  the  hair,  nor  the 
hands.  It  is  some  school  work,  rather  too  good 
for  most  of  the  Velasquez  pupils  and  yet  not  good 
enough  for  Velasquez  himself.  The  feeling  of  paint 
on  the  surface  of  the  dress  is  suggestive  of  Maze's 
method  of  work. 

413e.    Portrait    of   a   Lady.     This   is   probably   a 

school  piece  and  is  not  a  bad  portrait  though  by 
no  means  an  inspiration.  The  head  and  face  are 
well  drawn  and  the  figure  sufficiently  indicated. 
There  is  slight  indication  of  Velasquez  in  the 
drawing  or  handling.  Besides,  the  hands  suggest 
a  feebler  master. 

413f.    Three  Musicians.     It  is  a  good  piece  of  hard 

realism,  such  as  Velasquez  did  in  his  youth  and 
years  after  him  Manet  repeated.  Look  at  the  still- 
life.  The  heads  are  very  well  done,  and  possibly 
Velasquez  did  them,  but  Ribalta  and  Pacheco  did 
just  such  things  before  Velasquez.  The  drawing 
is  accurate,  if  hard. 

413a.    Portrait  of  Alessandro  del  Borro.     When  and 

where — in  what  pictures — did  Velasquez  ever  paint 
this  kind  of  a  portrait,  with  a  column,  a  flag,  and 
a  Netherland  burgher  in  Netherland  costume? 
Who  of  the  Spanish  School  ever  did  anything  of 
the  kind?  The  picture  is  certainly  not  by  Velas- 
quez, is  not  Spanish,  and  even  the  Borro  part  of 
it,  as  established  by  the  flag,  is  a  case  where  too 
much  has  been  derived  from  the  evidence.  On  its 
face  the  picture  is  of  Netherland  origin.  The 
Dutch  painters  of  Amsterdam  reproduced  the  type, 
pose,  costume,  column,  flag  again  and  again,  in 
their  shooting-company  pictures.     At  first,  in  con- 


** 


VELASQUEZ,  DIEGO  DE  SILVA  Y  113 

nection  with  the  bulk  and  pose  of  the  figure,  one 
thinks  of  Van  der  Heist.  In  his  portrait  of  Gerard 
Bicker,  in  the  Amsterdam  Museum  (No.  1140),  one 
finds  the  hair,  the  forehead  drawing,  the  eyes, 
mouth,  and  double  chin  of  the  Bono,  varied  some- 
what and  yet  practically  the  same.  The  pose  of 
the  Borro,  the  wrist  and  hand,  the  blacks  are  found 
in  Van  der  Heist's  shooting-company  picture  (No. 
1134),  in  the  Amsterdam  Museum,  and  the  left 
hand  of  the  Borro  appears  again  in  the  Paul  Potter 
portrait,  by  Van  der  Heist,  at  The  Hague  Museum. 
Other  resemblances  appear  in  other  portraits  by 
Van  der  Heist,  but  there  is  always  a  feeling  that 
the  Borro  is  too  strong  and  not  smooth  enough  in 
surface  or  drawing  for  Van  der  Heist.  Another 
possibility  arises  in  Jordaens.  The  portrait  of 
Admiral  Ruyter,  in  the  Louvre  (No.  2016),  presents 
striking  analogies  of  type,  and  the  drawing  of  the 
chin  and  forehead  is  alike.  Elsewhere,  as  in  por- 
traits at  St.  Petersburg  and  Madrid,  such  features  of 
costume  as  the  bag  breeches  and  cut  velvet  appear; 
the  peculiar  drawing  of  the  right  wrist  shows  again 
in  a  portrait  at  Budapest  (No.  438),  and  the  column 
is  frequently  seen  in  Jordaens 's  figure  compositions. 
Moreover,  there  is  a  brutal  strength,  a  bulk  and 
body,  a  feeling  of  physical  presence  that  strongly 
indicate  Jordaens.  Finally,  the  flesh-notes,  with 
their  tendency  to  warmth,  and  the  handling  of  the 
brush  with  its  tendency  to  load  in  lumps  are  char- 
acteristic of  Jordaens.  It  seems  nearer  to  Jordaens 
than  to  Van  der  Heist,  and  there  is  nothing  about 
it  that  a  man  of  Jordaens 's  originality  and  ability 
could  not  have  done. 

It  is  a  superb  portrait.     The  bulk  of  it,  the 
aplomb  of  it  are  superb.     The  present  composi- 


114  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

tion  is  odd,  and  the  grey  strip  of  paint  at  the  left 
of  the  figure  suggests  that  we  have  not  here  the 
whole  of  the  story.  This  may  have  been  a  figure 
in  a  group  that  was  cut  away  from  the  main  com- 
position.   But,  in  any  event,  it  is  a  fine  presentation. 

Venetian  School.    See  Bartolommeo  Veneto. 

912b.    Vermeer  (or  Van  der  Meet)  of  Delft,  Jan. 

**  Lady  with  Pearl  Necklace.  This  picture  is  supreme 
in  light  and  just  as  fine  in  its  delicate  colour.  The 
face,  hands,  and  background  are  scrubbed  too  much, 
and  the  lady  is  now  pallid  and  grey;  but  it  is 
doubtful  if  that  has  hurt  the  general  colour  effect, 
which  seems  quite  perfect  just  as  it  is.  Notice  the 
richness  of  colour  in  the  blue  cloth  and  vase, 
the  beauty  of  the  yellow  in  the  dress  repeated 
in  the  window-curtain  and  suggested  again  in  the 
back  of  the  chair.  Notice  also  the  foreshortened 
picture  on  the  wall  and  the  frame  of  the  window. 
A  work  of  rare  beauty  and  one  of  the  best  Vermeers 
in  existence.  No  trace  of  pointiUisme,  or  dotting 
with  the  brush,  is  here  apparent;  no  spottiness,  no 
hardness.  See  the  note  on  the  Vermeers  at  The 
Hague. 

912c.    Man   and   Woman  with   Wine,     The  figures 

have  no  great  charm  as  personalities  but  are  effec- 
tive as  colour  masses  in  the  composition.  The  col- 
our, with  its  repeated  notes  of  blue  and  red,  has 
not  the  refinement  of  No.  912b,  and  the  light  is 
cruder  and  less  diffused.  The  textures,  as  in  the 
jug,  are  very  well  rendered  and  the  room  is  rightly 
indicated.  It  is  a  very  obvious  performance  and 
has  no  mystery  about  it,  but  it  is  to  be  admired  for 
all  that.  There  is  a  note  of  blue  in  the  light  and 
air  peculiar  to  some  Vermeers.    With  sUght  traces 


VERROCCHIO,  WORKSHOP  OF  115 

of  pointillisme  but  not  nearly  so  marked  as  at 
Amsterdam  (No.  2528a). 
309.  Veronese,  Paolo  Caliari.  Minerva  and  Mars. 
With  a  well-modelled  back  of  Minerva  and  a  ques- 
tionable front  of  Mars.  A  workshop  piece  in  com- 
pany with  Nos.  303  and  311.  They  have  good  col- 
our and  some  fair  drawing. 

326  1  Jupiter,  Juno,  Cybele,  and  Genii.     This  group 

330  /  of  pictures  is  set  in  the  ceiling  of  Room  42  and 

*  gives  one  a  very  good  idea  of  how  the  group  may 
have  looked  in  the  Pisani  palace  at  Venice,  for 
which  it  was  originally  painted.  It  is  not  a  won- 
derful decoration  for  Paolo  and  yet  looks  wonder- 
fully well  because  the  gallery  direction  here  has  had 
enough  imagination  to  give  it  a  proper  setting. 

104a  1  Verrocchio,     Andrea.      Madonna     and    Child. 

108    J  The  authorship  of  these  pictures  may  be  open  to 

*  question,  but  possibly  the  painter  of  No.  104a  also 
did  No.  108,  and  both  pictures  are  interesting 
studies  for  the  connoisseur.  They  belong  to  a  se- 
ries of  Madonnas  of  Florentine  origin  much  con- 
fused and  not  readily  assigned  to  their  painters. 
No.  104a  is  clumsy  in  form,  hard  in  drawing,  as  in 
the  hands,  with  rather  acrid  colour  and  yellow- 
brown  flesh  shadows.  The  landscape  is  suggestive 
of  Lorenzo  di  Credi.  Compare  it  with  No.  108  for 
resemblances  in  the  head-dresses,  hands,  shadows, 
landscapes.  An  early  work  and  related  to  No.  296 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London. 

93.  Verrocchio,  Workshop  of.  The  Christ  Child 
and  St.  John.  The  landscape  is  most  interesting 
and  the  two  figures  charming  in  movement.  The 
latter  suggest  Lorenzo  di  Credi  without  leading  to 
any  conclusion.     The  Verrocchio  workshop  picture, 


116  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

No.  80,  in  this  gallery  is  possibly  by  the  same 
painter  that  did  the  Costanza  de'  Medici  (No.  2490) 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London,  there  assigned  to 
Lorenzo  di  Credi. 

38.    Vivarini,  Alvise.    Madonna  and  Child  Enthroned, 

*  with  Six  Saints.  A  good  Venetian  altar-piece  well 
framed  and  well  placed  in  the  gallery.  It  is  a 
little  hard  in  the  drawing  (see  the  St.  Sebastian) 
and  stiff  in  the  robes,  but  very  sincere  in  spirit 
and  just  as  true  in  feeling  as  the  Bellini  altar- 
pieces  of  the  time.  The  architecture  of  the  throne 
and  hall  is  magnificent,  the  robes  rich  in  colour, 
the  armour  done  in  a  convincing  manner.  The 
figures  rise  in  an  arch  and  suggest  or  repeat  the 
architecture  at  the  top.  The  general  colour  scheme 
is  somewhat  uncertain.  The  playing  angels  below 
are  attractive.  See  the  note  on  No.  1143  put  down 
to  Bartolommeo  Vivarini's  workshop. 

1165.    Madonna   and  Child  with   Four  Saints.      (In 

the  chapel  on  the  first  floor.)  This  altar-piece  is 
seen  to  good  advantage  in  its  present  setting  but 
not  by  standing  near  it.  It  is  a  large  panel  and 
should  be  seen  from  some  distance.  A  simple 
pyramidal  group,  rounded  up  at  the  top  to  meet  the 
arch,  with  supporting  saints  on  either  side.  The 
drawing  is  a  trifle  frail,  or  perhaps  the  types  give 
that  impression,  but  the  colour  is  rich  and  har- 
monious.    A  fine  altar-piece. 

5.    Vivarini,  Antonio.     Adoration  of  Kings.     Done 

*  in  the  early  time  of  the  painter,  when  under  the 
influence  of  Gentile  da  Fabriano,  the  catalogue  says, 
but  it  is,  perhaps,  nearer  to  Gentile  himself  without 
being  directly  by  him.  It  is  some  Gentile  school 
or  workshop  piece.     It  is  too  reminiscent  of  the 


♦ 


VIVARINI,  BARTOLOMMEO  117 

Adoration  in  the  Florence  Academy,  by  Gentile, 
to  be  very  far  removed  from  him.  It  is  beautiful 
in  its  decorative  scheme  of  colours  and  gold  with 
modelled  and  gilded  stucco  showing  in  the  crowns, 
haloes,  and  jewels.  The  robes  are  superb.  The 
heads  show  many  indications  of  individual  faces — 
direct  studies  from  nature.  This  is  also  apparent 
in  the  horses,  trees,  flowers,  the  distance,  and  the 
effect  of  sunlight  on  the  hills.  It  is  the  beginning 
of  nature  study  in  the  early  time  and  is  founded 
on  Gentile  da  Fabriano's  teaching  and  example. 

Life  of  the  Madonna.     Six  panels  fine  in  colour 

quality  of  which  the  one  of  the  Adoration  may  be 
compared  with  No.  5  for  similarity  of  workmanship. 
All  the  panels  are  decorative  and  quite  honest  in 
feeling.  They  show  Gentile  da  Fabriano's  influ- 
ence and  perhaps  Pisanello's.  The  catalogue  que- 
ries the  attribution  to  Vivarini. 

Vivarini,  Bartolommeo.  St.  George.  The  horse 
is  wooden  but  St.  George  is  very  noble,  and  the 
rescued  lady  at  the  right  is  unconsciously  prayer- 
ful in  her  beautiful  robes.  The  landscape  shows  a 
walled  city.  It  is  probably  a  Muranese  workshop 
picture.     The  background  is  hurt  by  repainting. 

Vivarini,  Bartolomineo,  Workshop  of.  Altar^ 
Piece.  Large  but  not  very  good  in  quality.  It 
is  interesting  as  a  study  of  early  Muranese  art. 
The  angels,  with  Christ,  at  the  top  are  the  best 
part  of  it.  It  shows  types  used  afterward  by  Cri- 
velli  and  also  Alvise  Vivarini.  Compare  it  with 
the  work  in  No.  38  in  this  gallery,  put  down  to 
Alvise,  beginning  with  the  eyes.  It  is  possibly  a 
workshop  piece  belonging  to  Alvise  rather  than 
to  Bartolommeo  Vivarini. 


118  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

1170a.  Vivarini,  School  of  the.  Mourning  over  the 
Christ.  It  has  suffered  in  its  surface  and  was 
always,  perhaps,  a  harsh  piece  of  drawing,  but  there 
is  a  tragic  quality  about  it.  The  colour  at  one 
time  had  the  same  hard  strength  as  the  drawing. 
[Now  (1913)  put  down  to  Bastiani.] 

832.    Vos,     Cornelis     de.      The    Painter's    Daughters. 

Two  charming  little  Flemish  girls,  in  the  costume 
of  the  time,  seated  on  the  floor.  They  are  thought 
to  be  the  painter's  daughters.  Notice  the  natural- 
istic grouping,  the  patterns  of  the  dresses,  the  odd 
shoes.  It  is  a  rather  dry  piece  of  painting  but 
effective  characterisation  and  good  colour.  These 
children  appear  again  in  the  Vos  Family  picture  at 
Brussels  (No.  503). 

634a.  Weyden,  Roger  van  der.  Miraflores  Altar- 
Piece.  A  triptych  with  a  Pieta  in  the  centre,  Christ 
Appearing  to  the  Magdalen,  and  a  Madonna  Ador- 
ing in  the  wings.  The  figures  are  pathetic,  tragic, 
with  robes  well  handled  and  fairly  good  in  colour. 
The  figure  of  Christ  is  attenuated  but  effective. 
There  are  beautiful  landscapes  at  the  back.  The 
small  bits  of  architectural  sculpture  are  carefully 
drawn  in  detail,  but  they  are  disturbing  to  the 
picture  as  a  whole  because  they  are  out  of  tone. 
The  blue  and  purple  cherubim  at  the  top  holding 
crowns  do  not  add  to  the  ensemble  of  the  picture. 
The  left  wing,  with  its  green,  red,  and  white  colour, 
is  the  least  pleasing  of  the  three  panels.  This  is  one 
of  the  best-authenticated  examples  of  Roger's  work 
known  to  history,  and  even  if  it  be  merely  a  copy, 
as  seems  probable  from  its  look,  it  should  still  be 
used  as  a  criterion  of  the  master's  early  manner 
and   method — his   types,  architecture,  landscape, 


WEYDEN,  ROGER  VAN  DER       119 

and  general  composition.  Compare  it  carefully 
with  No.  535  and  its  lack  of  quality  and  its  timid 
drawing  and  handling,  indicative  of  the  copy,  will 
be  apparent. 

534b.  John  the  Baptist  Altar-Piece.  The  architec- 
ture is  not  in  a  key  of  light  with  the  figures  and  is 
disturbing  to  the  composition  (see  the  pictures  by 
Marmion  in  this  gallery,  Nos.  1645  and  1645a,  for 
architecture  true  in  tone).  The  inner  views  at 
right  and  left  are  very  picturesque,  the  scene  at 
right  far  back  being  very  animated  and  full  of  col- 
our. A  good  piece  of  work  but  not  homogeneous 
in  effect.  It  is  probably  a  good  old  copy — better 
than  No.  534a — but  nevertheless  after  the  master 
and  not  by  him. 

635.    The  Middelhurg  Altar-Piece.     A  triptych  with 

**  an  Adoration  in  the  centre  and  Christ  Appearing 
in  the  two  wings.  A  well-known  picture  of  fine 
quality.  It  is  good  in  both  sentiment  and  work- 
manship. The  central  panel  is  a  balanced  composi- 
tion, with  a  Madonna  in  white  and  a  magnificent 
donor  in  black,  supposed  to  be  Pierre  Bladelin,  at 
the  right.  Notice  the  angels  above  and  below  and 
the  landscape.  The  panel  at  the  left  is  quite  won- 
derful in  the  texture  painting  of  the  brocade  worn 
by  the  kneeling  figure.  What  marvellous  tones  of 
blue,  green,  red,  yellow,  gold  are  here  brought 
together!  The  right  panel  is  quite  as  fine  as  the 
left  with  a  welter  of  jewels,  robes,  colours.  A 
walled  city  at  the  back.  It  seems  almost  too  elab- 
orate for  Roger  as  we  know  him  at  the  Escorial  and 
Madrid.  Some  there  be  who  think  it  by  a  younger 
Van  der  Weyden,  and  others  there  are  who  simply 
plead  ignorance.    There  are  many  things  yet  to 


120  KAISER-FRIEDRICH  MUSEUM 

be  learned  about  Roger  and  his  style.  This  is  the 
best  work  attributed  to  Roger  in  this  gallery  and 
is  apparently  an  original  work,  not  a  copy.  It 
should  be  compared  with  Nos.  101-103  in  the 
Munich  Gallery. 

545.   Charles  the  Bold.     A  fine  portrait,  full  of  sen- 

*  sitive  perception  and  done  with  great  simplicity. 
There  is  nothing  theatrical  or  even  dramatic  about 
it  as  one  might  expect  from  the  man  portrayed.  It 
is  plain  truth  carried  out  with  exact  detail  and  tell- 
ing effect.  Supposed  by  some  to  have  been  painted 
by  a  Roger  van  der  Weyden  II,  as  also  No.  535,  but 
there  is  not  too  much  logic  in  the  conclusion.  It 
looks  retouched,  is  a  little  soft  in  the  drawing,  and 
in  such  features  as  the  chain  and  the  hand  it  sug- 
gests the  copyist. 

545d.    Portrait   of  a    Young    Woman.      The   colour 

*  here  is  as  fine  as  the  firm  outline  drawing.  It  is 
simple,  direct,  excellent  work.  How  well  the  eyes, 
nose,  and  mouth  are  drawn,  the  head-dress  painted, 
the  dress  and  hands  given!  It  is  masterful.  It 
possibly  belongs  earlier  than  Roger — belongs,  per- 
haps, to  that  shadowy  "School  of  Robert  Campin" 
to  which  bothersome  pictures  of  the  time  are  now 
being  relegated. 

534c.    St.  Margaret  and  St.  Apollonia.     The  type, 

*  with  the  light,  the  colour,  the  gold  work,  the  land- 
scape, seems  entirely  different  from  Roger's  other 
work  here,  notably  No.  535.  The  picture  seems 
nearer  to  Chris tus  though  the  hands  deny  him. 
No  one  knows  who  did  it,  but  is  it  not  a  beautiful 
picture  in  every  way?  How  could  it  have  been 
done  better? 


ZURBURAN,  FRANCISCO  DE  121 

1656.  Witz,  Konrad.  Christ  on  the  Cross,  Notice  the 
placing  of  the  red,  blue,  and  yellow  in  the  robes  of 
the  figures  at  the  back  and  its  result  as  a  colour 
harmony.     With  an  excellent  background. 

1170.  ZoppO,  Marco.  Madonna  and  Child,  Enthroned, 
*  with  Four  Saints,  The  figures  are  squat  and  heavy, 
the  draperies  harsh,  uneasy  in  line,  and  full  of  odd 
wrinkles,  the  colours  brilliant  but  out  of  tone,  the 
landscape  fantastic,  erratic,  and  the  detail  of  flowers 
and  fruit  minute  and  painstaking.  The  total  re- 
sult is  rather  disturbing  because,  unlike  the  Panetti 
(No.  113)  near  at  hand,  the  figures  stand  out  of 
the  landscape  (almost  fall  out  of  the  picture  frame), 
instead  of  standing  in  and  keeping  their  place. 
Historically,  a  most  interesting  picture  and  pic- 
torially  possessed  of  rugged  force  and  good  feeling 
if  not  a  gracious  style.  Examined  in  the  detail 
it  is  really  remarkable,  but  taken  as  a  whole  it 
lacks  in  ensemble.  Somewhat  hurt  in  the  Ma- 
donna and  Child  by  repainting. 

404a.    Zurburan,    Francisco    de.     St,    Bonaventura. 

One  of  four  pictures  giving  scenes  from  the  life  of 
St.  Bonaventura — one  in  the  Dresden  Gallery  and 
two  in  the  Louvre.  This  one  shows  good  drawing 
in  the  heads  and  gowns  but  is  too  dark  in  light  and 
colour,  too  rectangular  in  pattern  to  be  agreeable 
art. 

404c.  Portrait  of  a  Boy  in  Armour,  A  very  sub- 
stantial boy  who  stands  solidly  if  awkwardly.  The 
legs  are  wooden,  like  those  in  the  portraits  some- 
times attributed  to  Velasquez.  The  huge  trousers, 
the  splendid  armour,  and  the  red  sash  are  well  done. 


INDEX  OF  PICTURES  BY  NUMBERS 


S.  1.  Garbo,  R.  del. 

2.  Cima. 

4.  Basaiti,  Pseudo 

5.  Vivarini,  Ant. 
S.  5.  Mantegna. 

7.  Cima. 

S.  8.  Catena. 

9.  Mantegna. 

JJ^  I  BeUini,  Giovanni. 

12.   Bellini,  School  of. 
S.  12.   Italian  School. 

12a.  Giorgione. 
S.  13.  Italian  School. 

14.   Carpaccio. 

Cima. 


!?)« 


Antonello  da  Messina. 


18 

18a 

19.   Catena. 

S.  20 1 T^ 

g  2i|Bruyn. 

21.   Ghirlandajo,  Dom. 

23    1 

23a  I  ^^^^ccio- 

25.  Antonello  da  Messina, 

School  of. 

26.  Girolamo  da  Santa 

Croce. 

27.  Mantegna. 
27a.  Squarcione. 

28.  Bellini,  Giovanni. 


29.  Mantegna. 

30.  Girolamo  dai  Libri. 

31.  Palma  Vecchio. 

37.  Basaiti. 

38.  Vivarini,  Alvise. 
Previtali. 
Bissolo. 


Montagna. 


Melozzo  da  Forli. 


39. 

43. 

44 

44b 

46a.  Liberale  da  Verona 

46c.  Bonsignori. 

47.   FogoHno. 

47a.  Castagno. 

49.   Pennacchi. 

g2  [  Borgognone. 

54  ' 
54a, 
55.   Conti. 

58.  Lippi,  Fra  Filippo. 

g^JMasaccio. 

59.  RosselU. 
60 
60a 
60b 
60c 
63b 
63c 
63d 
69. 
73. 


Angelico,  Fra. 
Benozzo  Gozzoli. 


Sassetta. 

Lippi,  Fra  Filippo. 
Pollajuolo,  Piero. 


123 


124 


INDEX 


Signorelli. 


73a.  PoUajuolo,  Antonio. 

78.   Botticelli. 

78a.  Lippi,  Filippino. 

79 

79a 

79b 

79c  ^ 

81.  Botticelli. 

82.  Lippi,  Filippino. 

83 1 

„_  >  Mainardi. 

90.   Garbo,  R.  del. 
90b.  Leonardo  da  Vinci. 
93.   Verrocchio,    Workshop 

of. 
95.   Lippi,  Fra  Filippo. 
95a.  Pisanello. 
96    1 
96a  J  ^^PP^'  FiUppino. 

98.   Garbo,  R.  del. 

100.  Credi. 

101.  Lippi,  Filippino. 

102a  I  ^^**^^®^- 
103.   Credi. 
104a.  Verrocchio. 
106   ] 

106a  [Botticelli. 
106b  J 

107.  Piero  di  Cosimo. 

108.  Verrocchio. 

109.  Sodoma. 

111.  Tura. 

112.  Costa. 
112c  1 

112d  }  Roberti. 
112b  J 

113.  Panetti. 
115.   Costa. 


Titian. 


115a,  Cossa. 

122.    Francia. 

129.    Fiorenzo  di  Lorenzo. 

131.  Palmezzano. 

132.  Bertucci. 
132a.  Pinturicchio. 
I.  133.  Foppa. 
137a.  Bonfigli. 
141.  Raphael. 
143.    Pinturicchio. 

^.y  \  Raphael. 

153.   Lotto. 

155 

157    \  Romano,  GiuUo. 

157a 

160a 

161 

163 

166 

167.    Moroni. 

169.    Bordone. 

174.    Palma  Vecchio. 

182.  Lotto. 

183.  Palma  Vecchio. 
185" 
188, 
191.   Bordone. 

193a  }^^"^^^- 
197.    Moretto. 

197b  I  -^^^^  Vecchio. 
204.   Piero  di  Cosimo. 
207.   Boltraffio. 
210a.  Marco  d'Oggiono. 
213.   Gaudenzio  Ferrari. 
218.    Correggio. 
222.   Melzi. 


Cariani. 


INDEX 


125 


225.    Solario. 
240.    Sarto,  A.  del. 
243.    Garofalo. 
245a.  Franciabigio. 
246.    Sarto,  A.  del. 

^^^^  I  Raphael. 

249.   Bartolommeo,  Fra. 

259b.  Sebastiano  del  Piombo. 

283.    Bugiardini. 

287.   Francia,  Giacomo 

298 

298a 

299 

300 

301. 

307 

307a, 

309.   Veronese,  P, 

310 

316 

320 

323 

325 

^^^}  Veronese,  P. 

338b.  Bronzino. 
380b.  Feti. 

404c}^^'^^'^°- 

405b.  Ribera. 

406b.  CoeUo,  Sanchez. 

407.   Carrefio  di  Miranda. 

408c.  Spanish  School. 

413a 

413c 

413e 

413p 


'  Tintoretto. 

Titian. 
>  Savoldo. 


Tintoretto. 


Lotto. 


I  Tiepolo. 


Velasquez. 


414.    Murillo. 

414b.  Cano. 

414c.  Murillo. 

448b.  Claude  Lorraine. 

459b 

459c 

501e.  Guardi. 

512- 1  Van   Eyck,    Jan   and 

523    j      Hubert. 

523a.  Van  Eyck,  Jan 

523b.  Christus,  P. 

525a  1 

ggi  Van  Eyck,  Jan. 

625g  J 

526a.  Netherland  School. 

627.   Daret. 

628b 

629 

629a 

629b 

629c  1  n,      ,. 
629d  /  Memhng. 

629E 

629F  \  Christus. 

632   J 

632a.  Ouwater. 

633 

633a  \  Bouts. 

633b 

634a 

634b 

534c 

535 

538a.  Master  of  F16malle. 

538b.  Netherland  School. 

639.   Bouts. 

646.   Weyden. 


Memling. 
Christus. 


Weyden. 


126 


INDEX 


645b  1^     * 

646d.  Weyden. 

551a.  Gossart. 

654.   Isenbrant. 

656.   Amberger. 

657d] 

657e    t^„ 

657F  P^«'- 

657qJ 

659a.  Cranach  the  Elder. 

661.   Metsys. 

664 

664a 

667 

567a 

667b 

569  Y^      ,       , 
2^2  f  Burgkmair. 

573    1 

573a/ 

574a.  Leyden. 

674c.  Metsys. 

575    1 

576a  \  Master  of  Frankfort. 

576b  j 

678.  Cleve,  Juste  van. 

683.  Amberger. 

683a.  Strigel. 

584a  \  t     j 

584b  f  ^^y^^^' 


Cranach  the  Elder. 


David. 


Holbein  the  Younger. 

Bruyn. 
>  Cranach  the  Elder. 


686b 

586d 

588. 

589 

593 

596A.Kuhnbach 


597a.  Breu. 

603a  P^^^^^- 

607.  Cornelisz  van  Oost- 

sanen. 

608.  Patinir. 

609.  Engelbrechtsen. 
615.   Cleve,  Juste  van. 
618.   Cranach  the  Elder. 
624.    Bles. 

630c  j  N^^^^^la^d  School. 

633b.  Cleve  the  Younger. 

638 

638b 

638c  \  Altdorfer. 


638e^ 
644A.'Scorel. 

650 1  Gossart. 

719.  Aertsen. 

750   ] 

750b  >  Keyser. 

750c 

762 

762a 

762b 

762c 

763a 

763b 

766.  Hals. 

770.   Dyck,  Van. 

774   ■ 

776a 

776b 

776c 

778.  Dyck,  Van. 


Rubens. 


Rubens. 


INDEX 


127 


Dyck,  Van. 


Terborch. 


781.   Rubens. 

782 

782a 

782b 

782c 

783}  Rubens. 

787a.  Dyck,  Van. 

791 

79lA 

79lB 

79lD 

79lE 

79lF 

79lG 

79lH 

792c.  Metsu. 

795b  1 

795c  >  Steen. 

795dJ 

798h.  Rubens. 

799.   Dyck,  Van. 

800   ' 

80lA 

801c 

80lF 

80lQ 

801H 

^}  Rembrandt. 

806b.  Seghers. 

806d.  Gelder. 

808.   Rembrandt. 

808a.  Seghers. 

809a.  Bol. 

810.   Rembrandt. 

810a.  Vermeer  of  Delft. 


Hals. 


Rembrandt. 


Rembrandt. 


811 

81lA 

811c 

812 

812a, 

813b.  Flinck. 

819c.  Maes. 

820.   Eeckhout. 

820b.  Hooch,  P.  de. 

82lA.  Koninck. 

823.   Rembrandt. 

825.   Heerschop. 

825a.  Heist,  van  der. 

828 

828a 

828b 

828c 

828d 

828b 

828p 

828h 

828j 

828l 

828m 

828n 

832.   Vos,  C.  de. 

832a.  Porcellis. 

845D.  Ostade,  Isaac  van. 

847.   Dou. 

853a  ]  Brouwer. 

853hJ 

861.   Cuyp. 

865e.  Goyen,  Van. 

872a.  Potter. 

875a.  CappeUe. 

884b] 

885    >  Ruisdael,  J.  van. 

885qJ 

886.   Hobbema. 


128 


INDEX 


Vermeer  of  Delft. 


Daddi,  Bern. 


Botticelli. 


901c.  Ruysdael,  S.  van. 

912b 

912c 

960b.  Molyn. 

985a.  Claez. 

1006.    Stoop. 

1058.   Vivarini,  Ant. 

1064 

1064a 

1070a.  Simone  Martini. 

1074a.  Giotto. 

1076.  Allegretto  Nuzi. 

1077.  Lorenzetti. 

1079.    Gaddi. 

1081a.  Lippo  Memmi. 

1124 

1128, 

1129a.  Palmezzano 

1132  lo  „  . 
^^33|SeUajo. 

1142.  Sienese  School. 

1143.  Vivarini,  Workshop  of 

Bart. 

1144.  Padua,  School  of. 
1147.    Ferrari,  Defendente. 
1156 
1156a 

1160.    Vivarini,  Bart. 
1162.  Schiavone. 

1165.  Vivarini,  Alvise. 

1166.  Pennacchi. 
1170.    Zoppo. 
1170a.  Vivarini,  School  of. 


Crivelli,  Carlo. 


1170b  1   rr. 

1170c  P^^^- 

1175.    Ferrarese  School. 

1177    ] 

1177  a  I  ^®^^^^»  Giovanni. 

1180.    Bellini,  Gentile. 
1182.    Bianchi. 
1234b.  Schaffner. 

1401b  }^^^^^'^-^^- 
1614.    Domenico  Veneziano. 

1616.  Boccati. 

1617.  Foucquet. 
1622a.  Goes,  Van  der. 
1629.    Schongauer. 

1631.  Geertgen  tot  St.  Jans. 

1635.  Ugolino  da  Siena. 

1640.  Backer. 

1643.  Corneille  de  Lyon. 

1645a  l^^""'^^^- 
1647a.  Bosch. 
1651.    Pesellino. 
1656.    Witz. 

1664.    Bartolommeo  Venezi- 
ano. 
1673.    Swabian  School. 
1700.    Lippi,  Fra  Filippo. 
1704.    Master  of  St.  Aegidius. 
N.  N.  Rembrandt, 
N.  N.  Tiepolo. 
N.  N.  Bellini,  Jaeopo. 


ROYAL  GALLERY,  DRESDEN 


NOTE  ON  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

This  gallery  has  been  famous  for  many  years  not 
only  because  Dresden  is  a  handsome  city  and  attracts 
many  strangers  but  because  the  gallery  itself  has  some 
world-famous  pictures  upon  its  walls.  One  master- 
piece alone — the  Sistine  Madonna  by  Raphael — has 
drawn  thousands  of  tourists  to  Dresden.  It  is  badly 
placed  in  a  small  room  and  much  distorted  by  side- 
lights for  which  it  was  never  intended,  but  still  there 
is  always  an  admiring  throng  before  it.  It  is,  perhaps, 
the  most  celebrated  picture  in  existence. 

When  Augustus  III  (1733-63)  came  to  power  and 
began  additions  to  the  royal  collection  at  Dresden  it 
was  the  fashion  of  the  day  to  admire  only  the  mature 
Italian  masters  of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  cen- 
turies. Names  were  in  demand  then  as  now,  and  so  it 
happened  that  Augustus  and  his  successor  managed  to 
pick  up  a  large  number  of  celebrated  canvases  by  paint- 
ers of  renown  in  the  art  worid.  They  are  now  in  the 
Dresden  Gallery,  with  many  others  of  later  acquisition, 
and  they  represent  the  late  Italians  very  well.  The 
eariy  Italians  were  not  seriously  considered  then,  but  in 
more  recent  years  the  deficiency  has  been  measurably 
supplied,  and  now  there  are  some  rare  examples  of  An- 
tonello  da  Messina,  Jacopo  de'  Barbari,  Bartolommeo 
131 


132       NOTE  ON  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

Veneto,  Cima,  Cossa,  Francia,  Mantegna,  and  oth- 
ers. But  the  large  canvases  of  the  Venetians  seem 
still  the  most  attractive  features.  The  splendid  Cuc- 
cina  pictures  by  Paolo  Veronese,  the  three  superb 
Palma  Vecchios,  the  wonderful  Venus  of  Giorgione,  the 
well-preserved  Tribute  Money  of  Titian,  the  Lottos,  the 
Tintorettos  make  up  a  remarkable  chorus — a  famous 
group  than  which  nothing  in  European  galleries  is  much 
finer.  Not  less  important  are  the  four  large  altar- 
pieces  by  Correggio  with  the  widely  known  Holy  Night 
among  them.  Not  outside  of  Parma  can  one  see  Cor- 
reggio so  well  represented  as  here.  Here,  too,  are  some 
men  of  the  Ferrarese  School  rarely  well  seen  in  the 
northern  galleries — Dosso  Dossi,  Girolamo  da  Carpi, 
Garofalo.  The  Italians  make  themselves  felt  at 
Dresden. 

Of  course  the  German  painters  were  never  neglected. 
There  are  large  and  excellent  examples  here  by  the 
Elder  Cranach — better  than  in  almost  any  other  Ger- 
man gallery — the  pathetic  Christ  on  the  Cross  by 
Durer,  the  Morett  the  Goldsmith  by  Holbein,  besides 
many  examples  of  less  well-known  men.  And  the 
Dutchmen  seemed  always  desirable.  There  are  six- 
teen pictures  put  down  to  Rembrandt,  and  among  them 
is  the  splendid  Manoah's  Prayer.  Nothing  could  be 
more  jewel-like  in  colour  or  profound  in  emotional  feel- 
ing than  this  picture.  There  are  Bols,  Eeckhouts, 
Flincks,  that  follow  Rembrandt,  a  dozen  or  more  Ruis- 
daels — some  of  them  of  the  best  quality — some  fine 


NOTE  ON  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY        133 

Terborchs,  Steens,  and  Ostades,  the  superb  Girl  at  a 
Window  by  Vermeer  of  Delft,  and  a  great  number  of 
the  smaller  Dutchmen  such  as  Metsu,  Mieris,  Dou, 
Wouwerman.  Rubens  is  here  in  sixteen  pictures,  Jor- 
daens  in  six,  Van  Dyck  in  twenty-six.  All  of  these 
examples  are  not  of  the  highest  rank,  and  some  of  them 
are  questionable  in  the  matter  of  their  attribution, 
but  out  of  them  all  one  gets  a  few  canvases  of  great 
worth  and  excellence.  The  French  School,  beginning 
with  Claude  and  Poussin,  is,  perhaps,  better  seen  here 
than  anywhere  outside  of  Paris.  These  French  pic- 
tures are  shown  in  the  east  wing  of  the  gallery,  across 
the  arched  roadway.  With  them  is  a  roomful  of  French 
portraits  in  pastel  that  should  be  looked  at.  On  the 
top  floor  of  the  gallery  is  an  interesting  collection  of 
modern  pictures. 

The  building  in  which  the  pictures  are  kept  is  de- 
cidedly picturesque  in  external  appearance,  and  is  fairly 
well  fitted  for  a  gallery.  It  is  properly  lighted  but 
usually  ill  ventilated,  especially  during  the  summer 
months.  The  rooms  have  high  ceilings  and  occasionally 
pictures  get  "skied,"  but  the  hanging  is  as  satisfactory 
as  circumstances  will  permit.  The  visitor  should  no- 
tice the  fine  old  frames,  especially  those  of  the  small 
Dutch  pictures  in  the  side  cabinets. 

The  catalogue,  in  German,  French,  and  English,  is 
arranged  by  numbers  and  schools,  which  requires  con- 
tinual reference  to  the  index.  It  is  accurate  and  has 
critical  value.     The  notes  frequently  give  the  diverse 


134   NOTE  ON  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

attributions  of  the  various  pictures  with  candour. 
There  is  an  evident  attempt  to  get  at  the  truth  whether 
it  favours  the  official  opinion  or  not.  Hanfstaengl  has 
reproduced  in  book  form  the  chief  pictures  of  the  gal- 
lery, and  besides  these  one  can  get  good  photographs  at 
the  door. 


THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

7.   Angelico,    School    of    Fra.    Annunciation.    A 

small  and  feebly  drawn  picture  (look  at  the  hands), 
but  with  a  rich  effect  of  gold  work  and  colour. 

52.   Antonello  da  Messina.    St,  Sebastian,    An  un- 

*  usually  large  example  of  Antonello  with  Venetian 
influence  very  apparent  in  it.  He  was  never  in  the 
Netherlands,  never  a  pupil  of  Jan  van  Eyck,  as 
Vasari  says,  but  he  certainly  knew  the  Flemish 
method  of  working  in  oils,  and  probably  got  it 
from  Flemish  painters  working  in  Italy.  He 
brought  this  method  to  Venice,  and  no  doubt  had 
his  influence  on  the  Bellinis  and  was  in  turn  influ- 
enced by  them.  This  picture  shows  in  its  archi- 
tecture, chimney-pots,  rugs  the  Gentile  Bellini 
influence.  It  is  an  excellent  picture.  Those  who 
do  not  care  for  St.  Sebastians  might  get  some  plea- 
sure out  of  the  colour  and  the  architecture  or  even 
the  chimney-pots  or  the  little  landscape  with  fig- 
ures. Notice  the  foreshortened  St.  Christopher  (?) 
lying  at  the  left,  and  notice  above  him  and  all 
through  this  picture  the  effect  of  light  coming  from 
the  blue  sky  and  casting  luminous  shadows — un- 
der the  arches,  for  instance.  Unfortunately,  some- 
what hurt  by  repainting. 

80.    Bacchiacca,  Francesco  Ubertini.     The  Story  of 
the  King's  Sons.     The  picture-story  is  told  with 
some  spirit  and  a  good  deal  of  bad  drawing.    No- 
135 


136  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

tice  at  the  right  the  king's  body  and  arms,  how 
badly  drawn  they  are,  or  the  nude  hanging  figure. 
Everywhere  the  hands  are  poorly  done.  Formerly 
put  down  as  a  St.  Sebastian  by  Franciabigio — 
Bacchiacca's  master.  It  has  the  blue-green  colour 
of  Bacchiacca.  Notice  the  companion  piece,  No. 
75,  for  better  work  done  by  Franciabigio. 

1587.  Backer,  Jacob  Adriaenz.  Bust  of  a  Young  Man 
in  a  Red  Cloak.  A  good  portrait  by  Backer  though 
it  once  passed  under  the  name  of  Koninck.  Being 
something  of  a  Rembrandt  imitator,  his  works  were 
formerly  attributed  to  Rembrandt,  and  some  of 
them  are  no  doubt  still  under  Rembrandt's  name. 
Notice  that  the  subject  of  this  portrait  looks  a 
little  like  the  so-called  Rembrandt  portraits,  so 
much  so  that  it  might  be  mistaken  for  one  of  them. 

113.  Bagnacavallo,  Bartolommeo  Ramenghi.  Ma- 
donna with  Four  Sainjts.  It  is  a  masterwork  of  this 
painter.  Very  like  Dossi  in  its  types,  composition, 
dark  shadows,  and  rich  reds,  greens,  and  blues. 
The  draperies  are  broadly  done  and  the  painting 
shows  some  dexterity. 

69a.   Barbari,  Jacopo  de'  (Jacob  Walch).     Galatea. 

A  sad  but  rather  powerful  Galatea.  It  shows 
German  influence  and  has  a  suggestion  of  Baldung 
about  it.  The  type  is  more  Germanic  than  Italian 
as  one  may  see  even  in  the  feet.  The  outline  draw- 
ing and  colour  are  excellent.  Notice  the  sea  and 
the  study  of  the  waves.  Notice  also  the  loop  of 
the  brown  drapery,  how  it  accents  the  roundness 
of  the  figure.  The  picture  has  been  restored  but 
still  has  grace,  charm,  spirit.  Nos.  57,  58,  59, 
assigned  to  this  painter,  are  slight  works. 


BASSANO,  LEANDRO  137 

108.    Baroccio,     FederigO.     Ascension     of    Madonna. 

Warm  in  colour  and  freely  handled,  with  something 
in  the  colour  suggestive  of  Andrea  del  Sarto.  Not 
a  bad  picture  for  a  decadent. 

107.   Hagar  and  Ishmael.    Showing  the  influence 

of  Correggio  upon  Baroccio.  The  head  of  Hagar 
is  that  of  Correggio*s  Zingarella  at  Naples,  as  the 
catalogue  points  out.  The  colour  and  air  and  light 
of  the  picture  are  very  good.  And  how  nicely  it 
is  painted! 

201a.  Bartolommeo  Veneto  (Veneziano).  Daughter 
*  of  Herodias,  The  work  of  a  north-Italian  painter 
(probably  Bartolommeo  Veneto)  and  apparently 
showing  some  influence  from  German  painting.  It 
looks  very  much  like  the  white  portrait  (No.  13) 
at  the  Staedel  Institute,  Frankfort,  which  shows 
an  even  greater  German  influence.  The  green  robe 
with  the  red  cuffs  and  the  minute  work  on  the  hair, 
dress  borders,  chain,  and  charger  all  indicate  an 
Italian  swayed  by  the  northern  manner.  The  his- 
torians of  art,  however,  only  allow  of  his  being  in- 
fluenced from  Milan  or  Cremona.  A  very  interest- 
ing picture  with  an  individuality  about  it  (even 
in  its  oddity  or  awkwardness)  that  has  outlived 
many  more  conventional  works.  How  fine  it  is 
in  its  greens  and  reds! 

283.  Bassano,  Leandro.  Portrait  of  a  Man  Writing. 
It  fills  the  space  about  the  window  with  the  figure, 
very  much  as  the  portrait  (No.  1127)  at  Munich, 
ascribed  to  Tintoretto  but  really  by  a  Bassano. 
There  is  nothing  of  inspiration  in  this  work  but 
much  of  good  substantial  portraiture. 

2811  The    Doge     Grimani     and    His      Wife.     The 

282  J  woman's  portrait  (No.  282)  is  the  finer  of  the  two 


138  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

in  colour  and  general  decorative  quality.  The  same 
way  of  disposing  the  figure  about  the  window  shows 
in  these  pictures  as  in  No.  283,  though  this  was  not 
a  peculiarity  sacred  to  the  Bassano  family. 

252a.     Bassano,  JacopO.      Samson  and  the  Philistines. 

This  picture  has  had  its  day  as  a  Giulio  Romano, 
and  again  as  a  Bordone.  Now  it  is  put  down  by 
Frizzoni  as  an  early  Jacopo  Bassano.  It  has  some 
earmarks  peculiar  to  Bassano,  but  it  is  also  like 
his  master,  Bonifazio.  A  good  piece  of  colour, 
though  the  picture  has  been  much  repainted. 

53.  Bellini,  School  of  Giovanni.  The  Doge  Lore- 
dano.  Probably,  as  Morelli  insisted,  a  variation 
of  the  Doge  Loredano  in  the  National  Gallery, 
London.  The  face  is  hard,  leathery,  almost  im- 
possible, but  the  robe  is  fairly  well  done,  and  there 
is  a  charming  little  view  through  the  window  of  a 
Venetian  island  and  lagoon.  Other  versions  are  in 
the  Bergamo  Gallery  (No.  398)  and  the  Correr 
Museum,  Venice. 

604.  Bellotto,  Bernardo.  Verona,  There  are  many 
Bellottos  in  this  gallery,  but  the  larger  part  of  them 
are  not  good  in  quality  and  are  perfunctory  in 
execution.  The  best  pictures  by  this  artist  are  to 
be  seen  in  the  Vienna  Gallery,  where  they  give 
one's  preconceived  notions  of  Bellotto  a  violent 
jar. 

831.  Beuckelaer,  Joachim.  The  Four  Evangelists. 
There  is  some  strong  drawing  here,  as  one  may  see 
by  the  hands  and  faces;  but  this  painter  has  a 
brutal  strain  in  his  work  that  counts  better  with 
still-life  and  peasants  for  subjects  than  with  evan- 
gelists. The  types  are  strong  but  not  very  refined. 
The  architecture  at  the  back  is  crowded. 


BOL,  FERDINAND  139 

68.    Bevilacqua,Ambrogio.     Madonna  Adoring  Child, 

*  A  lovely  picture,  pure  in  sentiment  and  charming 
in  colour.  The  garden  is  formal,  but  the  landscape 
back  of  it  is  free  and  spacious.  Notice  the  angels 
above;  also  the  churches  or  castles  at  right  and 
left  on  the  mountain  tops.  The  pose  of  the  Ma- 
donna has  something  of  the  look  of  Francia's  Ma- 
donna of  the  Rose  Trellis  at  Munich  (No.  1039). 
Done  in  distemper.  It  has  a  flat  surface — dull  but 
pleasing. 

603.  Bol,   Ferdinand.      The  Rest  in  Egypt,    To  be 

compared  with  the  Holy  Family  (No.  324)  in  the 
Munich  Gallery,  put  down  to  Rembrandt.  This  is 
the  weaker  picture,  but  it  suggests  the  Munich 
picture  in  types,  colour,  drawing,  and  composition. 
Faded  out  in  colour  and  pallid  in  the  flesh.  The 
composition  is  pyramidal.  The  still-life  is  fairly 
well  done,  though  everything  is  soft  in  substance. 

604.   Jacob's  Dream,     The  angel  is  good  in  pose 

and  nicely  painted  in  the  wings,  but  rather  weak 
in  the  face.  It  might  be  compared  with  the  same 
subject  hanging  near  by — No.  1618a,  by  Eeck- 
hout — which  is  still  weaker.  Both  pictures  prob- 
ably came  out  of  the  same  studio.  No.  1618a 
evidently  having  been  done  by  a  poorer  painter 
following  the  painter  of  No.  1604.  The  angel  is 
Bol's  angel  in  both  pictures. 

605.    Jacob  before  Pharaoh,     The  head-dresses  and 

portions  of  the  garments  are  reminders  of  Rem- 
brandt, but  the  heads  and  faces  are  much  weaker 
than  Rembrandt.  It  is  a  good  picture.  The 
•Joseph  is  the  same  model  as  in  the  pictures  No. 
809a  at  Berlin,  ascribed  to  Bol,  and  No.  828, 
ascribed   to   Rembrandt.     Compare   it   with  No. 


140  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

1600  here,  put  down  to  Flinck.  The  colour  is  good 
but  palHd,  and  now  yellowed  by  varnish.  The 
picture  is  injured  at  the  top. 

1606.    Portrait    of  a    Young    Man    Wearing   a   Hat. 

Notice  the  Rembrandtesque  quality  of  this  Bol  in 
its  light,  shade,  golden-grey  tone,  costume,  colour. 
It  is  soft  in  modelling  and  lacks  accent;  but  Bol  was 
not  always  so  weak,  and  sometimes  painted  pictures 
now  confused  with  those  of  his  master,  Rembrandt. 
Compare  this  with  the  work  in  the  Hunter  with 
the  Bittern,  by  Rembrandt  (No.  1561). 

208.  Bonifazio  dei  Pitati.  Finding  of  Moses.  Sev- 
eral pictures  in  this  gallery  attributed  to  Bonifazio 
are  good  in  their  schemes  of  colour,  if  loose  and  un- 
certain in  their  drawing.  The  painter  is  seen  at 
his  best  in  the  Venice  Academy.  Morelli  insisted 
that  there  were  three  of  this  name,  but  modern 
criticism  has  settled  down  to  one,  Bonifazio  dei 
Pitati — the  others  being  merely  hooks  upon  which 
to  hang  the  works  of  followers  and  imitators.  This 
work  is  carelessly  done,  but  rich  in  colour  and  with 
a  broad  landscape.  An  arched  group  of  figures 
with  outlets  at  the  sides  into  the  background. 

204.  Bordone,  Paris.  Diana  Hunting.  It  hangs  high 
on  the  wall  and  looks  much  repainted.  Notice  the 
coarse  quality  of  the  hair  and  the  hard  landscape, 
especially  in  the  foliage.  The  dogs  are  good.  The 
colour  is  cold  and  the  drawing  poor. 

203.  Apollo  between  Marsyas  and  Midas.  A  char- 
acteristic Bordone  half-length,  but  apparently  in 
better  condition  than  usual,  or  else  painted  with 
greater  care. 

205.  Holy  Family  and  St.  Jerome.  An  odd  pic- 
ture for  Bordone.     The  St.  Joseph  is  much  hurt 


BRUEGHEL  THE  ELDER,  JAN  141 

and  changed  in  colour.  The  landscape  is  like  that 
of  a  Bonifazio. 

8.  Botticelli,  Sandro.  Madonna,  Child,  and  St. 
John.  It  has  all  the  Botticelli  earmarks,  but  not 
his  spirit  or  quality.  It  is  probably  a  workshop 
piece. 

9.   Life  of  St.  Zenobius.   A  panoramic  picture  that 

gives  one  a  very  faint  idea  of  Botticelli.  The  filling 
of  the  panel  with  groups  of  small  figures  was  an 
unhappy  thought,  for  it  produces  a  scattered  effect 
which,  for  all  the  central  group  and  the  lines  lead- 
ing up  to  it  from  the  left,  holds  throughout  the 
picture.  The  action  is  excited,  the  drapery  un- 
easy, the  architecture  rectangular  and  uncompro- 
mising. The  colour  is  rather  monotonous  in  red; 
the  landscape  is  very  good.  It  is  one  of  a  series 
another  panel  of  which  is  in  the  Metropolitan 
Museum  of  New  York.  By  no  means  a  representa- 
tive Botticelli  though  genuine  enough. 

1888.    Breu,  Georg.     The  St.  Ursula  Altar-Piece.  Harsh 

and  rather  repellent  art,  but  very  true  and  honest 
work,  and  (in  the  side  panels)  very  decorative. 
Notice  the  panel  at  the  left  with  its  fine  colour  and 
good  landscape.  The  central  panel  has  too  much 
in  it.    Formerly  the  work  passed  as  a  Burgkmair. 

1058 1  Brouwer,    Adriaen.     Peasants  Quarrelling.     Ex- 

1059  J  cellent  pictures  from  a  painter's  point  of  view.  No. 
1058  is  fine  in  breadth  of  handling  and  in  colour. 
Notice  the  setting  of  the  room  in  No.  1059.  It  is 
not  so  well  painted  nor  so  good  in  colour  as  No. 
1058. 

892.    Brueghel  the  Elder,  Jan  (Velvet).     Windmill. 

There  are  a  large  number  of  small  Brueghels  in 


142        THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

this  gallery,  some  of  them  (as  Nos.  891,  886,  and 
889)  very  picturesque  in  brightly  coloured  figures, 
wagons,  horses,  and  landscapes.  They  are  pictures 
that  can  be  lived  with. 

21.  Capponi  (or  Carli),  Raffaele  dei.  Madonna, 
Child,  and  Saint.  It  has  no  great  strength,  but  in 
its  place  a  half-Umbrian  sentiment.  The  Madonna 
is  inclined  to  be  merely  pretty,  but  the  picture  is 
pleasing.  The  painter  is  not  identical  with  Raf- 
faelino  del  Garbo,  according  to  Berenson.  There 
is  dispute  about  identities  just  here. 

Carli.     See  Capponi. 

64a.  Catena,  Vincenzo.  Madonna  with  St,  Peter 
and  St.  Helena.  It  is  crude,  even  for  Catena,  as 
notice  the  work  on  the  hair  or  the  drawing  of  the 
heads.     It  is  probably  a  school  copy. 

Cavazzola.     See  Morando,  Paolo. 

61.  Cima,  Giovanni  Battista.  The  Saviour.  Christ 
standing  with  the  book  in  his  left  hand,  and  back 
of  him  a  characteristic  Cima  landscape.  The  head 
of  Christ  is  fine,  the  drapery  a  little  hard  but  falling 
free,  the  colour  excellent,  the  handling  rather  broad 
for  Cima. 

.  63.    Presentation  of  Mary  in  the  Temple.     A  pic-    \ 

*  ture  that  Titian  may  possibly  have  seen  before 
painting  his  Presentation  in  the  Venice  Academy 
(No.  626).  Notice  the  similarity  in  the  composi- 
tions, even  including  the  old  market  woman  with  the 
basket  of  eggs.  In  colour  and  architecture  Cima's 
picture  is  Venetian;  in  costume  it  is  suggestive 
of  Constantinople  and  the  East.  The  Virgin  is 
very  naive,  as  is  also  the  boy  seated  on  the  lower 
steps.    The  hills  are  a  bit  too  blue  and  have  not 


CLEVE,  JUSTE  VAN  DER  BEKE  VAN         143 

the  beauty  of  Titian's  mountains.  But  it  is  a  good 
Cima. 

730.  Claude  Lorraine.     Flight  into  Egypt,    A  large, 

*  ideal  landscape  with  lofty  trees,  flowing  water, 
distant  hills,  and  high  sky  with  flaky  clouds.  It 
is  cool  in  light  and  colour  save  at  the  horizon, 
very  classic  in  feeling,  imposing  by  its  linear  and 
aerial  perspective.  It  represents  Claude  rightly, 
although  not  free  from  immaturities  of  technique, 
and  a  somewhat  formal  composition.  The  build- 
ings in  the  middle  distance  show  well. 

731.   Acis  and  Galatea.     Another  fine  example  of 

*  Claude,  showing  a  sunset  sky  across  a  sea  with  a 
rocky  coast  at  the  right.  It  is  quite  as  fine  in  its 
way  as  No.  730,  except  in  the  sky.  The  figures  in 
both  pictures  are  merely  foreground  spots  of  colour 
that  serve  to  give  the  names  to  the  pictures.  They 
were  probably  painted  by  another  hand  than 
Claude's.  A  very  good  study  of  water.  The  trees 
are  somewhat  grandiloquent  and  the  clouds  are 
hard-edged.  But  for  its  time  this  is  imposing  and 
impressive  landscape  work. 

809.    Cleve,  Juste  van  der  Beke  van  (Master  of  the 
Death   of  the  Virgin).     Adoration  of  the  Magi, 

The  smaller  example  here  is  just  as  interesting  as 
the  larger  one  (No.  809a).  It  is  crowded  in  com- 
position, but  full  of  interesting  detail  in  types, 
columns,  robes,  landscape.  Somewhat  cleaned  in 
the  faces.  Attributed  to  Lucas  van  Leyden,  Gos- 
sart,  and  others. 

809a.   Adoration   of  Magi,     A   large   composition 

with  many  figures.  The  types  are  strong;  the 
people  are  sincere.  There  is  some  uneasiness  in 
the  red  and  blue  robes  with  much  beauty  pf  pat- 


144  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

tern  in  the  brocade  at  left.  The  landscapes  at  the 
right  and  left  are  interesting.  The  small  detail  in 
the  foreground  serves  to  fill  up  without  adding  to 
the  value  of  the  picture  though  done  with  the  skill 
of  a  goldsmith.  This  painter's  work  is  confused 
with  that  of  other  painters  of  his  time  and  is  as- 
signed more  or  less  tentatively. 
150.  Gorreggio,  Antonio  AUegri  da.  Madonna  of 
*  St.  Francis.  An  early  Correggio,  done  probably 
before  he  was  twenty,  and  suggestive  of  his  early 
influences.  His  masters  and  teachers  are  unknown 
or  at  least  shadowy;  but  this  early  picture  shows 
the  influence  of  Leonardo  da  Vinci  in  the  type  of 
the  Madonna,  in  the  smile,  the  heavy  eyelid,  nose, 
chin,  face,  contours,  shadows.  Her  foreshortened 
hand  is  like  that  of  Leonardo's  Madonna  of  the 
Rocks  (Louvre,  No.  1599)  and  also  like  that  of 
Mantegna's  Madonna  of  Victory  (Louvre,  No. 
1374).  The  type  of  face  of  St.  John  is  also  Leonar- 
desque.  St.  Catherine  and  St.  Francis  are  remind- 
ers of  Francia  or  Costa.  The  colour  is  slightly 
suggestive  of  Garofalo,  while  the  white  medallion 
speaks  for  the  Ferrarese.  But  all  these  remi- 
niscences fade  out  in  Correggio's  later  works.  This 
picture  is  a  pyramidal  composition  framed  by 
Ionic  columns  at  the  side.  The  Madonna  is  heavy 
in  the  knees  and  hips;  the  foreshortening  of  the 
figure  is  not  perfect.  The  drapery  is  wonderfully 
free  for  a  boy-painter  and  the  colour  is  pleasing 
if  not  great.  The  lower  part  of  the  picture  is  re- 
painted (for  instance,  in  the  supporting  cupids  or 
putti) ;  the  sky  back  of  the  angel  heads  is  also  gone, 
and  the  modelling  of  the  hands  has  been  hurt. 
Cleaned  too  much  and  injured  all  through,  but 
still  attractive.   Notice  the  Correggio  spirit  of  joy- 


CORREGGIO,  ANTONIO  ALLEGRI  DA         145 

ousness  so  early  apparent  in  the  little  angels  and 
the  ecstatic  saints. 

151.    Madonna  of  St,  Sebastian,     In  bad  condition 

and  very  much  repainted.  Since  Correggio*s  death 
no  fewer  than  five  different  restorers  have  been 
painting  upon  it.  Evidently  bitumen  or  something 
akin  to  it  was  used  in  the  shadows  (as  also  in  the 
column  shadows  of  No.  150)  and  this  has  blackened 
it  much.  As  an  example  of  the  repainting,  notice 
the  face  of  the  St.  Roch  sleeping  at  the  right. 
None  of  the  Correggio  surface  remains,  but  in  a 
general  way  it  has  his  drawing,  composition,  and 
colour.  The  sentiment  is  also  more  or  less  his  and 
is  a  trifle  overdone.  The  Madonna  is  merely 
pretty  and  the  supporting  angels  are  affected. 
The  St.  Sebastian  is  perhaps  too  ecstatic.  The 
most  natural  and  naive  figure  of  the  group  is  that 
of  the  little  angel  astride  of  the  cloud  at  the  right 
of  the  centre.  A  pyramidal  composition  but  not 
a  restful  one — not  even  in  the  St.  Roch,  who  sleeps 
in  a  position  as  impossible  as  that  of  the  Antiope 
in  the  Louvre  (No.  1118). 

152.  The  Holy  Night,  It  was  a  technical  peculi- 
arity of  Correggio  that  he  centralised  his  light  and 
surrounded  it  with  darks  as  a  relief  and  a  foil.  Here 
his  method  of  handling  light  and  dark  exactly 
fitted  the  incident  he  was  called  upon  to  narrate. 
The  Child  in  the  Manger  is  shown  as  the  Light  of 
the  World.  All  the  light  emanates  from  him.  It 
strikes  the  face  of  the  Madonna,  illumines  the 
shepherds,  and  lights  up  the  clouds  and  angels 
above.  Once  a  beautiful  picture  but  now  injured 
by  flayings  of  the  surface  and  repaintings.  Still 
lovely  as  a  pattern  of  light  and  shade  and  beauti- 


*« 


146  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

ful  in  the  graceful  legs  of  the  flying  angels  at  the 
top.  The  colour  in  the  angels  is  fine  but  that  of 
the  central  figures  is  perhaps  too  cool.  The  dawn 
is  just  apparent  along  the  distant  horizon.  No 
doubt  this  was  originally  the  best  of  the  four  large 
pictures  here,  but  all  of  them  have  been  much 
changed  by  the  warping  and  splitting  of  the  panels 
and  the  necessary  repainting  that  followed. 

153.    Madonna  of  St.   George.     A  little  lumpy  in 

*  the  figures,  and  somewhat  huddled  in  the  composi- 
tion. Again  a  pyramidal,  balanced  composition 
with  saints  supporting  the  Madonna  on  either  side. 
The  Madonna's  figure  as  seated  is  almost  impossible. 
She  is  telescoped.  St.  John  at  left  and  the  Cupids 
in  the  foreground  are  heavy  and  fleshy.  St.  George 
stands  badly,  and  the  saint  back  of  him  has  affec- 
tation written  in  his  hands.  The  arabesque  of  fruit 
at  the  top  seems  to  count  for  little.  In  colour, 
perhaps,  the  most  attractive  of  the  four  large  Cor- 
reggios.  The  picture  has  been  repainted,  but  is 
apparently  in  better  condition  than  the  others. 

154.   Magdalen.    Put  down  as  an  "apparent"  Cor- 

reggio.  Morelli,  in  1880,  rather  damaged  it  as  a 
Correggio  by  pointing  out  that  it  was  painted  on 
copper — a  material  not  used  by  the  Italian  paint- 
ers until  long  after  Correggio's  time  but  much 
used  by  painters  in  the  Netherlands.  Morelli  called 
it  a  Netherland  copy  of  a  lost  Correggio.  The 
wonder  is  that  with  its  prettiness,  its  porcelain  sur- 
face, its  manicured  finger-nails,  and  its  petty  details 
it  could  ever  have  been  put  down  to  Correggio  at 
any  time.  It  shows  nothing  of  his  manner  and  is 
probably  a  seventeenth-century  original  that  came 
from  the  Netherlands. 


CRANACH  THE  ELDER,  LUCAS  147 

155.    -Portrait  of  a  Scholar,     Given  by  Morelli  to 

Dossi  and  in  the  catalogue  only  tentatively  to 
Correggio.  A  fairly  good  portrait  but  it  has  suf- 
fered from  cleaning  and  repainting.  It  is  a  work 
difficult  to  assign  with  any  certainty  to  any  painter. 

43.    Gossa,  Francesco  deL     The  Annunciation.    An 

*  early  and  very  good  work  of  this  rare  Ferrarese 
painter.  It  is  somewhat  crude  in  colour  and  harsh 
in  drawing.  The  Madonna  type  is  short  in  stat- 
ure, with  uneasy  drapery  probably  studied  from 
sculpture  and  suggesting  the  influence  of  Man- 
tegna.  The  picture  is  also  Paduan  in  the  head  and 
hair  and  drapery  of  the  angel.  The  Renaissance 
architecture  is  particularly  fine  though  obtrusive 
and  the  central  column  divides  the  composition 
and  makes  two  distinct  pictures  with  two  points 
of  sight.  Notice  how  beautifully  and  naively  the 
background  scenes  are  given. 

1906g\  Granach  the  Elder,  Lucas.  Portraits  of  the 
1906h  J  Duke  Henry  and  the  Duchess  Katherina.  With 
*  much  gilding  to  show  the  gold  of  the  brocades. 
Perhaps  the  pictures  are  too  large  for  the  use  of 
gold.  In  any  event,  they  seem  to  have  been  re- 
gilded  and  are  now  too  bright.  The  effect  is  over- 
ornate.  The  flat  figures  and  angular  drawing  give 
a  grotesque  look  in  which  even  the  dogs  join,  but 
the  pictures  are  very  considerable  works  of  art  for 
all  their  oddity.  How  exceedingly  decorative  the 
dress  of  the  Duchess! 

1906e  1  St.   Catherine  and  St,   Barbara,     These  fig- 

L906f  J  ures  were  done  more  than  once  by  Cranach.  It 
is  questioned  whether  the  panels  here  are  by  his 
own  hand  or  are  school  pieces,  but  in  either  case 
they  are  very  decorative,  graceful,  and  charming 


1«  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

figures,  beautiful  in  their  robes  and  crowns,  and 
lovely  in  colour. 

1915.  Duke  Henry,  Again  the  attribution  is  ques- 
tioned, but  what  a  picture  to  hang  in  a  baronial 
hall!  Here  it  looks  odd  and  out  of  place.  Cra- 
nach's  conceptions  seem  peculiarly  ill  fitted  to  show 
in  a  gallery.  They  have  a  quality  that  seems  to 
require  isolation  for  appreciation.  Considered  by 
itself,  this  archaic  presentation  with  its  coat  of 
arms  and  inscription  in  gold  is  excellent. 

1914.   Ecce  Homo,    Piteous  in  the  sentiment  of  it. 

The  drawing  is  a  little  rambling,  as  notice  the  hands. 
The  colour  in  the  putti  is  merely  indicated.  What 
charming  putti! 

1916a.   Adam  and  Eve,     Like  No.  1916,  it  is  excel- 

*  lent  in  outline  drawing.  And  how  very  sincere  in 
the  thinking  and  feeling  as  well  as  the  drawing! 
What  decorative  panels  in  colour!  Notice  the  fo- 
liage, the  fruit,  and  the  sky.  Other  versions  else- 
where.    See  also  the  repetitions  Nos.  1911-1912. 

1908.    Christ  on  the  Mount,     This  picture,  with  No. 

1907,  does  not  show  Cranach's  drawing  or  colour 
to  advantage.  The  trees  against  the  sky  make  a 
good  pattern,  but  even  this  is  not  up  to  his  best 
work. 

1913.  Christiana  Eulenau,  It  is  probably  a  work- 
shop picture  but  is  rather  fine  in  type  as  well  as 
clever  in  the  manner  of  its  execution. 

1917.   A  Nude  Chijfl.     How  very  naive!     It  is  just  as 

charming  for  the  north  as  Carpaccio's  children  for 
Italy.  And  how  beautifully  drawn  in  outline! 
There  are  a  large  number  of  Cranachs  at  Dresden. 
He  lived  and  died  at  Wittenberg,  near  here,  which 


CREDI,  LORENZO  DI  149 

may  account  for  the  size  of  the  collection.  Some 
of  the  pictures,  however,  are  school  pieces. 

)52.  Granach  the  Elder,  Lucas  (School  of).  Me~ 
lanchthon  on  his  Death-Bed.  It  is  interesting  not 
only  for  the  likeness  of  the  great  reformer  but  also 
as  a  lovely  study  in  whites.  Notice  how  well  the 
values  of  the  different  whites  are  maintained.  No- 
tice also  the  drawing  of  the  hair  and  the  beard. 
See  the  portrait  of  Luther  (No.  1918)  and  also  the 
living  Melanchthon  (No.  1919). 

146.    Granach  the  Younger,  Lucas.     Crucifixion.    It 

is  a  rather  weak  picture  but  interesting  for  its  red 
scheme  of  colour.  Notice  that  even  the  sky  seems 
to  run  blood-red. 

13.  Gredi,  Lorenzo  di.  Madonna  and  Child  with 
Infant  St.  John.  It  seems  a  little  warm  in  colour- 
ing for  Lorenzo  di  Credi  and  has  a  Flemish  look 
about  its  smooth  surfaces  and  textures,  especially 
in  the  Madonna's  sleeve.  The  landscape  seen 
through  the  window  is  also  Flemish-looking.  But 
these  are  superficial  resemblances,  perhaps.  Not 
a  great  picture,  but  not  without  charm.  It  has 
had  a  varied  experience  among  the  experts,  as  the 
catalogue  note  records.  It  is  certainly  by  the 
painter  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  (No.  1043a)  in 
the  Munich  Gallery,  there  ascribed  to  Leonardo  da 
Vinci  but  possibly  by  some  one  in  Verrocchio's 
studio. 

14.   Holy  Family.     This  is,  perhaps,   nearer  the 

usual  manner  of  Lorenzo  di  Credi  than  No.  13  and 
has  much  that  suggests  his  cold  blues,  greys,  and 
greens.  The  flesh-notes  are  pasty  and  wanting  in 
colour,  the  outline  drawing  severe,  the  types  of  faces 
and  figures,  with  the  landscape,  characteristic,  but 


150  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

the  whole  work  lacks  in  the  quality  of  its  drawing 
and  handling,  and  is  probably  by  some  follower  of 
Lorenzo. 

15.    Madqrina  with  Saints.     As  the  catalogue  says, 

a  hard,  cold  picture  in  the  late  period  of  the  master. 
It  has  nothing  to  commend  it  in  colour  and  little 
in  drawing  or  composition.  A  formal,  common- 
place picture  with  chilly  blues  and  greens. 

1782.  Cuyp,  Aelbert.  Boy  and  Dog,  Much  admired 
by  the  passing  throng  but  it  is  too  smooth  and 
pretty.  The  boy  is  badly  drawn  and  the  dog 
badly  painted.  Notice  the  boy's  arms  and  hands. 
His  head  is  too  large  for  his  body.  The  picture  is 
hardly  clever  enough  for  Cuyp. 

509.  Dolci,  Carlo.  St,  Cecilia.  The  smooth-faced 
saint  is  pictured  with  boneless  hands  and  dropsical 
fingers  playing  at  an  organ.  The  sentiment  of  it 
is  about  the  cheapest  produced  by  the  Decadence. 
Yet  it  is  much  admired.  See  also  No.  508  or  No. 
510  for  the  same  affected  elegance, 

124.    Dosso  Dossi   (Giovanni  Lutero).    St,   George, 

A  picture  attributed  to  Dosso  Dossi  by  Morelli 
and  to  Girolamo  da  Carpi  by  Berenson.  Possibly 
inspired  by  the  Raphael  St.  George  in  the  Hermitage, 
as  the  catalogue  suggests.  Dark  in  tone,  with  an 
exaggerated  lighting  derived  indirectly  from  Gior- 
gione.  Compare  the  light-smitten  landscape  and 
city  in  the  background  with  that  in  the  Carpis 
near  to  it  (Nos.  142  and  144)  and  also  with  the 
Dosso  Dossi  (No.  126).  St.  George  is  a  fine  type, 
clad  in  beautiful  armour,  and  the  princess  is  fine 
in  colour.  An  interesting  picture  somewhat  black- 
ened and  also  repainted  in  parts. 


J 


DOU,  GERARD  :i51 

St,  Michael.     It  is  after  the  large  Raphael 

(ascribed)  in  the  Louvre — St.  Michael  and  the 
Dragon.  Like  the  original,  it  is  a  little  theatrical. 
Dark  in  tone. 

-Justice.    This  is  apparently  a  genuine,  if  not 


a  very  good  Dosso  Dossi.  The  figure  is  a  little 
heavy  and  the  drawing  of  the  eyes,  nose,  and  hands 
hard.  The  greens  and  reds  are  effective.  The 
landscape  is  interesting. 

Peace.    Evidently  a  companion  piece  to  No. 

126  but  perhaps  not  entirely  by  the  same  hand. 
Compare  the  drawing  and  colouring,  the  left  hand, 
and  the  feet  with  those  in  No.  126.  The  figure  is 
lumpy,  like  a  Salviati,  and  the  drawing  is  hard.  It 
is  a  weaker  picture  than  No.  126. 

Vision    of   Four   Church  Fathers.      A  double 

composition.  The  upper  part  makes  a  separate 
picture.  The  lower  angels  in  the  clouds  at  the 
left  (intended  to  bind  the  two  parts  together)  are 
graceful  but  out  of  key.  Not  a  very  successful 
composition  as  a  whole.  There  is  a  light-smitten 
city  at  the  back,  as  in  No.  124,  and  some  good  col- 
our.    See  also  No.  129. 

Dossi  (School  of).  The  Dream.  Possibly  by 
Dosso  Dossi  but  weird  in  theme  and  crude  in 
painting.  The  figure  of  the  dreamer  is  not  unlike 
this  painter's  type.     It  is  rather  heavy. 

Dou,  Gerard.  Portrait  of  the  Painter  in  His 
Studio.  In  Don's  small  manner,  with  a  carefully 
detailed  inventory  of  all  his  belongings,  given  with 
every  dot  and  dash  correctly  placed  with  weari- 
some and  hopeless  exactness.  Nos.  1717  and  1719 
are  much  better  examples.     Nos.  1716  and  1717  in 


XS2  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

subject  and  style  should  be  carried  in  mind  to  the 
Louvre  at  Paris  and  compared  with  the  so-called 
Rembrandt  there  (No.  2541a). 

1720.   Woman  Reading.     Here  is  Dou  in  his  Rem- 

brandtesque  manner,  with  the  same  pose,  drawing, 
handling,  and  colour  that  we  frequently  see  in  the 
"early  Rembrandts"  of  so  many  European  gal- 
leries. 

1869.  Diirer,  Albrecht.    The  Dresden  Attar-Piece.    Done 

*  in  tempera  on  linen,  which  gives  it  its  lustreless, 
grey  look.  Somewhat  stained  also  and  much  re- 
stored. It  has  decisive  drawing  still,  is  full  of  feel- 
ing in  the  Madonna,  and  is  lovely  in  such  details 
as  the  little  angels  with  the  crown,  the  small  ones 
sweeping  the  floor,  the  carpenter  shop  at  the  left, 
the  landscape  at  the  right.  In  its  present  state, 
what  fine  decorative  colour  it  has !  The  St.  Sebas- 
tian and  St.  Anthony  in  the  wings  are  less  interest- 
ing though  extremely  well  done  and  better  preserved 
than  the  centre-piece. 

1870.   Christ  on  the  Cross.    One  of  the  most  pathetic 

*  figures  in  art.  The  picture  is  in  the  same  class 
with  Rembrandt's  Supper  at  Emmaus  in  its  emo- 
tional significance.  The  figure  of  Christ  hanging 
there  quite  alone  and  deserted,  the  dark  sky  over- 
head, the  serene  landscape  at  the  back,  as  though 
to  symbolise  the  listlessness  of  nature  or  the  world, 
are  distinctly  impressive.  This  is  an  early  con- 
ception. Rubens  treated  it  later  with  more  ma- 
turity of  thought  and  brush,  expressing  the  con- 
ception more  completely  but  with  less  feeling  and 
pathos  (No.  748  in  the  Munich  Gallery).  The  fig- 
ure here  is  slight  but  beautifully  placed  in  relation- 
ship to  the  dark  sky  and  emphasised  by  the  white 


I 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  153 

cloth.  Diirer  repeated  the  figure  in  his  Trinity  at 
Vienna  (No.  1145). 

1871.    Portrait   of  Barent  van   Orley.     It  is  a  little 

formal  and  perfunctory.  The  shadows  are  dirty 
and  (in  the  neck)  false.  The  drawing  of  the  out- 
line rambles  somewhat.  A  late  picture  and  not 
Diirer's  best. 

840.  Dutch  School.  Holy  Family.  Not  a  picture  of 
the  first  rank  or  quality  but  an  early  Flemish  (?) 
work  of  some  sentiment,  colour,  and  good  crafts- 
manship. The  back  of  the  room  is  well  given  but 
the  drawing  in  the  hands  and  draperies  is  lax  and 
uncertain. 

846  _ — -Portrait  of  a  Woman.  An  excellent  character- 
isation, fine  in  type,  fairly  well  drawn,  and  simple 
in  treatment.  Formerly  thought  to  be  in  "the 
manner  of  Holbein,"  which  is  perhaps  nearer  the 
mark  than  its  present  attribution.  It  is  German, 
not  Dutch. 
1017.  Dyck,  Anthony  van.  The  Drunken  Silenus.  It 
shows  a  following  of  Rubens  and  not  a  very  good 
one  either.  It  is  hot  in  colour  and  badly  flayed  by 
cleanings.  The  figure  at  the  extreme  left  is  almost 
destroyed— notice  the  face  and  wretched  handling 
of  the  hair.  A  similar  picture  is  in  the  Brussels 
Gallery.  Both  of  them  follow  Rubens's  Bacchanal 
at  Munich  (No.  754),  with  variations  and  additions. 

1018-  \ Apostles.    Study  heads,  like  Rubens  in  style, 

1021a  j  and  probably  done  in  the  Rubens  studio.  If  by 
Van  Dyck  they  are  early  work.  They  are  well 
done — that  is,  well  drawn  and  painted,  but  rather 
hot  in  flesh-notes.  Others  of  the  series  are  seen 
at  the  Louvre  and  Hermitage. 


« 


154  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

1022.    Portrait  of  an  Old  Man,     This  seems  to  be  in 

the  style  of  No.  960,  put  down  to  Rubens.  They 
are  both  possibly  by  the  same  hand,  but  it  should  be 
insisted  upon  that  the  hand  cannot  be  positively 
recognised  as  that  of  either  Rubens  or  Van  Dyck. 
It  is  good,  rather  hesitating  portraiture  which 
may  favour  the  youthful  Van  Dyck  authorship. 
The  nose  and  eyes  are  Van  Dyck's  but  the  beard 
and  ruff  are  like  Rubens's  work. 

1023.    Portrait  of  an  Old  Lady.     It  is  similar  to  No. 

1022  and  raises  the  same  question  of  attribution. 
Again  an  excellent  portrait,  though  heavily  handled 
in  the  face  and  perhaps  repainted. 

1023a.    Portrait  of  a   Young  Man,     It  is  similar  in 

style  to  No.  1023c  but  hotter  in  colour.  The  thin 
painting  of  the  hair  and  neck  with  the  drawing  of 
the  mouth  and  moustache  and  the  colour  are  sug- 
gestive of  Rubens;  but  the  drawing  of  the  eye 
shows  Van  Dyck.  It  is  not  wise  to  be  arbitrary 
about  assigning  these  peculiar  portraits  to  either 
Rubens  or  Van  Dyck.  They  are  exactly  like  neither 
painter.  There  may  be  a  third  Rubens  pupil,  whose 
name  we  do  not  even  know,  who  may  have  painted 
them.    They  are  excellent  portraits. 

1023b.    Portrait  of  a  Lady  and  Child,     Probably  a 

true-enough  Van  Dyck,  but  so  much  cleaned  and 
repainted  that  it  is  about  done  for.  At  one  time 
put  down  to  Rubens,  but  it  is  a  flayed  Van  Dyck — 
skinned  down  to  the  white  high  lights.  Look  at 
the  wrecked  curtain  at  the  left.  The  hands  and 
faces  are  nearly  as  badly  off. 

1023c  \ Portraits  of  a  Man  and  a  Woman,     Excellent 

1023d  J  portraits  in  good  condition.  In  the  style  of  No. 
*       960,  attributed  to  Rubens,  and  with  Rubens's  red 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  155 

shadows  in  the  flesh;  but  enough  like  Van  Dyck 
to  make  a  positive  attribution  to  either  painter 
impossible.  They  are  fine  portraits.  How  easily 
they  rest,  and  what  strong  characters  they  are! 
Cleaned  but  not  repainted  to  any  extent. 

Portrait  of  a  Man.  Much  cleaned  and  re- 
painted. Look  at  the  restorer's  beard  and  mous- 
tache. 

Children  of  Charles  /.     It  is  thin  and  weak. 

Probably  an  old  copy  of  the  Windsor  Castle  pic- 
ture. At  any  rate,  not  entitled  to  very  serious 
consideration. 

-Henrietta,  Wife  of  Charles  I,     It  is  a  copy  or 


worse.  Weak  and  thin  all  through,  with  a  super- 
ficial elegance  worthy  of  Lely.  The  figure  is  flat 
against  the  brocade  at  the  back,  and  all  the  red 
ground  comes  forward.  Notice  also  the  flat,  shad- 
owless doing  of  the  white  lace.  Then  go  back  to 
the  hard,  white-china  face. 

1025.   The  Child  Jesus,     It  is  in  the  pretty  style  of 

Van  Dyck  but  possibly  by  some  later  imitator. 
Van  Dyck  did  work  less  well  drawn  and  heavier  in 
handling  than  this,  but  he  hardly  attempted  such 
things  as  the  foreground  discloses  in  the  snake, 
the  leaves,  the  flowers.  That  seems  the  work  of  a 
later  Fleming. 

1029.   Portrait  of  a  Man.     A  palpable  Van  Dyck, 

and  yet  very  different  from  Nos.  1023c  and  1023d, 
put  down  to  him  in  this  gallery.  Here  he  is  simply 
the  conventional  Van  Dyck  doing  a  half-length 
with  some  skill  but  no  fine  feeling. 

1027  1  Portraits  of  a  Man  and  a  Woman,     These  two 

1028  J  portraits  have  the  unhappy  apoplectic  flesh  that 


156  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

belongs  not  so  much  to  Van  Dyck  as  to  the  last 
century's  restorers.  The  pictures  are  hurt,  es- 
pecially the  background  in  the  portrait  of  the 
woman,  in  the  ruffs  and  cuffs,  and  in  the  face.  Van 
Dyck's  mannered  style  shows  here. 

1035.  Portrait  of  a  Man  in  Furs.  There  is  no  appar- 
ent reason  for  thinking  it  by  Van  Dyck.  It  is 
unlike  him  and  is,  perhaps,  nearer  to  some  Ger- 
man painter  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

1024.   St,  Jerome.     A  picture  that  serves  to  empha- 

*  sise  the  wide  difference  between  Rubens  and  even 
his  best  pupil.  Compare  it  with  the  Rubens  St. 
Jerome  (No.  955  on  the  same  wall),  of  which  it  is 
a  variation.  Van  Dyck  was  following  his  master 
as  closely  as  he  could;  and  yet,  what  a  difference! 
Notice  this  difference  in  the  drawing  and  also  in 
the  flesh  colouring.  Van  Dyck  is  hot  where  Rubens 
is  cool  and  serene.  In  the  handling  Van  Dyck  is 
bready,  gummy,  heavy  where  Rubens  is  fluent, 
flowing,  certain  to  the  last  degree.  Van  Dyck  put 
in  the  curtain  at  the  top  as  an  improvement  on  the 
Rubens,  but  it  fails — it  makes  the  composition 
restless.  Notice,  on  the  contrary,  the  serene  feeling 
of  peace  in  the  Rubens — the  sense  of  space  there  is 
about  it.     But  both  are  notable  pictures. 

1618.  Eeckhout,  Gerbrandt  van  den.  Presentation 
in  the  Temple.  To  be  compared  with  No.  1931, 
by  Poorter.  Here  is  a  stronger  follower  of  Rem- 
brandt, with  little  of  Poorter's  weakness  and  sweet- 
ness. Eeckhout  is  more  confused  with  Rembrandt 
than  any  other  of  Rembrandt's  pupils.  He  has 
been  so  bewilderingly  confused  by  the  various  at- 
tributions of  authorities  that  one  has  difficulty  in 
identifying  his  work.     It  is  usually  coarse,  strong, 


EYCK,  JAN  VAN  157 

ill-drawn  work,  with  dark,  blackish  shadows  and 
often  spotty  high  lights.  This  picture  formerly 
passed  as  a  Rembrandt. 

1618a.   Jacob's  Dream.    The  central  angel  is  Bol's 

model.  The  painter  of  this  picture  borrowed  from 
Bol  all  through.  It  is  a  poor  following  of  No.  1604, 
ascribed  to  Bol.  Apparently  it  has  little  of  Eeck- 
hout  about  it,  though  duly  signed  and  dated. 
843.  Engelbrechtsen,  Gornelis.  Temptation  of  St, 
Anthony.  A  small,  round  picture  in  which  the  pat- 
tern of  the  figures  and  the  trees  fills  the  circle  very 
well.  Notice  the  graceful,  Bles-like  figure  at  the 
right  with  the  long,  flowing  gown.  The  colour  is 
attractive.     Formerly  listed  as  a  Lucas  van  Leyden. 

1835.    Everdingen,  AUart  van.     Stag  Hunt  by  a  Moun- 

*  fain  Lake.  With  a  dark-clouded  sky  of  some 
strength.  A  much  better  landscape  than  Ever- 
dingen  usually  painted  and  as  good  as  a  Hobbema 
or  a  Ruisdael.  The  figures  are  thought  to  have 
been  painted  by  Berchem,  but  they  add  little  to  the 
general  effect.  The  picture  is  dominated  by  the 
sky  and  air  of  the  distance. 

1838.   Water  Mills.    A  good   landscape,  well  held 

together,  and  fairly  well  painted.     The  sky  and 
trees  are  a  bit  crude  in  their  doing.     See  also  No. 
1837.     It  is  of  about  the  same  quality. 
799.    Eyck,  Jan  van.    Altar-Piece.    At  first  glance  the 

*  most  notable  features  of  this  picture  are  the  lovely 
colours  of  the  Madonna's  robes  and  the  magnificent 
baldacchino  back  of  and  above  her.  The  church 
is  excellent  in  the  drawing  of  its  columns,  capitals, 
and  the  saints  in  niches  above  them,  with  the  round 
gig-lamp  window-panes  back  of  the  columns.  This 
centre  panel  is  supposed  by  Weale  and  others  to  be 


158  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

by  Hubert  van  Eyck.  The  wings  are  possibly  by 
a  later  and  different  hand  (so  Weale  surmises), 
but  they  match  the  central  portion  very  well  and 
are  by  no  means  to  be  overlooked.  Notice,  for 
instance,  the  angel  at  the  left  and  the  fine  type  of 
the  donor  kneeling  below.  In  the  opposite  wing 
the  blue  robes  of  St.  Catherine  are  perhaps  too 
high  in  key.  She  wears  a  beautiful  crown  and  has 
a  charming  little  landscape  back  of  her.  See  the 
catalogue  note  for  the  various  attributions  of  this 
altar-piece.  There  are  donors  in  grisaille  on  the 
outside  of  the  wings. 
1591.  Fabritius,  Bernaert.  Portrait  of  a  Woman. 
This  portrait  may  suggest  the  possible  painter  of 
some  of  the  black-shadowed,  square-fingered  pic- 
tures attributed  to  Rembrandt,  notably  No.  1568, 
in  this  gallery.  Fabritius  was  a  pupil  of  Rem- 
brandt. His  pictures  are  scarce  because  most  of 
them  are  given  to  Rembrandt  but  there  are  fair 
examples  of  him  at  the  Darmstadt  Gallery. 

223.    FarinatO,    Paolo.     Presentation   in    the   Temple. 

In  the  style  of  Paolo  Veronese  but  much  slighter 
and  weaker  in  every  way.  It  is  good  in  colour  and 
interesting  in  pattern.  It  comes  nearer  to  being  a 
Zelotti  than  a  Farinato,  but  that  is  no  great  matter. 
A  fine  decorative  canvas. 
249.  Fasolo,  Giovanni  Antonio.  Portrait  of  a  Vene- 
tian. If  we  could  see  behind  the  veil  of  its  repaint- 
ing no  one  knows  what  surprise  might  be  sprung 
upon  us.  Paolo  Veronese's  own  hand  might  be 
there.  But  we  shall  not  know  more  than  that  it 
once  was  a  good  picture. 

149a.    Ferrarese  School.    Deposition.    A  small  panel 
in  apparently  good  condition.     There  is  sentiment 


FLORENTINE  SCHOOL  159 

in  the  figures,  although  it  is  a  Httle  weak  and  leans 
toward  sentimentality.  The  painter  of  it  can  only 
be  guessed  at.  He  is,  perhaps,  one  of  the  many 
whose  names  have  not  come  down  to  us. 

J08.  Flemish  School  (15th  Century).  An  Altar 
Wing  with  St,  Elizabeth.  Fine  in  colour,  with  a 
graceful  figure,  a  gorgeous  robe,  and  an  excellent 
sky.  The  companion  panel,  No.  807,  is  not  so 
interesting. 

)00.  Flinck,  Govaert.  Old  Man  with  a  Red  Cap.  It 
is  a  sketchy  study  and  gives  us  small  idea  of  Flinck 
as  a  Rembrandt  follower — the  thing  about  him  in 
which  we  are,  perhaps,  the  most  interested.  The 
handling  here  is  free  but  not  very  sure,  the  colour 
a  bit  foxy,  and  the  modelling  an  attempt  at  rugged- 
ness  given  with  some  softness.  There  is  a  feeling 
that  the  head  is  wanting  in  depth — the  suggestion 
of  the  right  eye  does  not  carry  the  conviction  that 
there  is  a  right  side  to  the  head.  The  same  hand 
did  the  Head  of  a  Turk  (No.  325)  at  Munich,  as- 
signed to  Rembrandt. 

)02.    —David     Giving     the    Letter    to    Uriah.     It    is 

flashy,  in  the  yellow  robe  as  elsewhere,  and  shows  a 
superficial  following  of  Rembrandt  methods.  But 
it  is  suggestive  of  some  Rembrandts  the  student 
meets  with  in  the  European  galleries.  It  has,  per- 
haps the  same  eye  and  hand  behind  it  as  the  David 
and  Saul  (No.  621)  at  The  Hague,  the  Christ  be- 
fore Pilate  (No.  368)  at  Budapest,  the  Centurion 
Cornelius  in  the  Wallace  Collection,  London  (No. 
86).     Originally  thought  to  be  by  Bol. 

22.  Florentine  School.  Madonna,  Child,  and  St. 
John.  The  sentiment  of  it  seems  more  Umbrian 
than  Florentine,  as  also  the  figures  of  the  children, 


160  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

the  hands,  the  flesh-notes,  and  possibly  the  land- 
scape. Notice  the  beautiful  head  of  St.  John. 
Not  strong  but  sincere  work,  and  very  good  in 
colour.  It  has  been  variously  attributed  to  Lo- 
renzo di  Credi,  to  followers  of  Botticelli  and  Filip- 
pino,  to  Umbrian  painters,  to  Raffaelino  del  Garbo; 
but  it  is  a  pleasing  picture  with  no  name  at  all 
attached  to  it. 

48.  Francia,   Francesco.    Baptism  of  Christ,    The 

*  picture  has  been  injured  by  repainting  (see,  for 
example,  the  ruined  hand  of  the  angel  at  the  left) 
but  still  remains  a  fine  example  of  Francia  and  a 
noble  picture  in  spirit.  It  is  a  simple  composition 
— a  balanced  arrangement  of  figures  against  a 
background  amphitheatre  of  hills.  The  dip  of  the 
sky-line  is  repeated  in  the  aureole  of  the  dove  and 
contrasted  in  the  arch  of  the  figures — the  line  carry- 
ing from  St.  John  over  the  head  of  Christ  to  the 
angels  at  the  left.  Notice  the  well-drawn  figure 
of  Christ.  The  picture  is  much  warmer  in  colour 
and  light  than  is  usual  with  Francia.  The  senti- 
ment of  the  characters  is  excellent  in  the  beseech- 
ing attitude  of  the  St.  John  and  the  quiet  sub- 
mission of  the  Saviour.  Notice  that  Christ  stands 
on  the  water  instead  of  in  it — something  that  may 
interest  theologians  who  follow  the  doctrine  of  im- 
mersion. 

49.   Adoration  of  the  Magi,     A  small  picture  in 

the  mature  period  of  the  master.  Brighter  in  col- 
our and  more  enamel-like  in  surface  than  No.  48. 
A  graceful,  decorative  panel  but  cold  in  the  sky 
and  distance. 

75.    Franciabigio    (Francesco     Bigi).      Bathsheba. 

Compared  with  the  companion  piece  by  Bacchiacca 


GELDER,  AERT  DE  161 

(Ubertini,  No.  80),  this  is  a  better  work  in  both 
drawing  and  colour  and  the  architecture  is  much 
truer  in  tone.  The  bathing  figures  at  the  left  are 
well  drawn  and  graceful.  And  what  life  there  is  in 
the  small  figures  on  the  balconies!  The  sky  b 
lead-coloured.  The  whole  picture  is  laid  in  with 
a  large  half-tone. 

132- 1  Garof alo  (Benvenuto  Tisi).  Poseidon  and 
135  J  Athena.  Various  small,  dusky  pictures  but  not 
very  important  ones.  They  have  Garofalo's  man- 
nerisms, his  shortcomings,  and  also  much  of  his 
acceptable  colour;  but  some  of  them  are  not  above 
suspicion  of  being  by  Stefano  Falzagalloni,  a  clever 
imitator  of  Garofalo. 

140.    Jesus   in   the   Temple.     A   picture  With   rich, 

warm  colour.  The  arrangement  of  the  figures  is 
formal  and  balanced  but  one  cares  little  about  that 
or  the  drawing.  The  charm  of  the  picture  lies  in 
its  colour.     It  is  an  excellent  Garofalo. 

1791.    Gelder,  Aert  de.-     Presentation  of  Christ.     In  its 

general  effect  a  very  good  picture,  but  the  effect  is 
more  Rembrandt's  than  Gelder's.  He  is  following 
his  master  here,  but  at  some  distance.  Fair  in 
colour  but  rambling  in  the  composition.  It  lacks 
concentration,  the  light  is  scattered,  and  the  draw- 
ing is  weak.     Somewhat  injured. 

1792a.  An  Important  Document.  The  central  fig- 
ure of  the  woman  is  very  good.  The  man  at  the 
right  is  sacrificed  in  colour  and  light — too  much  so 
for  the  need  of  the  picture.  But  the  general  colour 
scheme  is  excellent.  The  attribution  has  been 
questioned.  See  the  picture  at  Munich,  No.  355, 
probably  painted  by  the  same  hand. 


162  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

1792.    A  Halberd  Bearer.     It  has  the  coarse,  hit-or- 

miss  drawing  of  Gelder  and  some  of  his  colour.  A 
work  of  no  great  importance  though  it  has  good 
tone  about  it.     Once  attributed  to  Rembrandt. 

1905.    German  School  (15th  Century).     Portrait  of  a 

*  Man.  It  is  very  fine.  Look  at  the  head  and  hands. 
Also  the  green  dress.  Possibly  some  Netherland 
influence  shows  here.  It  is  thought  by  critics  to  be 
of  Netherlandish  origin,  but  the  German  of  it  seems 
marked.  The  light  sky  has  probably  been  re- 
painted and  rendered  a  little  out  of  tone. 

185.  Giorgione  (Giorgio  Barbarelli).  Sleeping  Ve- 
***  nus.  In  many  respects  this  is  the  pearl  of  the 
Dresden  Gallery.  Originally  a  superb  figure  by 
Giorgione  with  a  landscape  painted  in  after  Gior- 
gione's  death  by  Titian,  as  the  Anonimo  tells  us. 
A  cupid  was  placed  near  the  feet  (probably  by 
Titian  again)  but,  long  afterward,  painted  out. 
The  spot  where  it  was  still  shows  through  the  over- 
painting.  The  landscape  has  the  same  buildings 
at  the  right  that  appear  in  Titian's  Noli  Me  Tan- 
gere  in  the  National  Gallery,  London.  Unfor- 
tunately, the  picture  has  been  much  repainted, 
and  the  quality  of  the  linen  under  the  figure,  the 
flesh-colour,  the  landscape,  and  sky  have  been  badly 
injured.  But  the  beautiful  lines  of  the  figure  are 
still  there.  Notice  the  long  swing  of  the  under 
line  from  the  elbow  to  the  foot  and  the  wonderful 
delicacy  of  modelling  that  still  shows  in  the  figure. 
It  should  be  compared  with  the  nude  figure  in 
Titian's  Sacred  and  Profane  Love  in  the  Borghese 
Gallery,  Rome,  one  of  the  most  beautiful  of  all 
nudes  and  very  close  in  spirit  and  execution  to 
this  Giorgione  Venus.     The  feet  and  legs  of  the  fig- 


GOYEN,  JAN  VAN  163 

ures  are  very  much  alike.  Perhaps  Titian  painted 
on  this  figure,  too — possibly  altered  or  changed 
it  somewhat.  The  Anonimo's  statement  is  very 
brief.  The  Venus  is  nude  but  not  naked,  and  is 
more  refined  than  Botticelli's  Venus  in  her  sea-shell. 
Look  at  the  face  and  notice  the  purity  of  it.  The 
colour  (especially  the  red)  is  not  what  it  once  was 
but  is  still  pleasing.  The  landscape,  too,  has  suf- 
fered but  it  is  still  broad  and  simple.  Formerly 
regarded  as  a  copy  after  Titian  by  Sassoferrato, 
until  Morelli  declared  it  by  Giorgione. 

186.  Giorgione  (after).  The  Horoscope,  Giorgio- 
nesque  in  type  and  style  but  hard  in  outline  and 
bad  in  drawing.  Compare  the  statue  in  the  niche 
with  the  Sleeping  Venus  (No.  185)  in  this  gallery 
for  form.  Notice  also  the  crude  work  in  the  white 
phoenix.  It  is  a  poor  affair  probably  by  Romanino. 
The  Giorgione  Paris  and  Shepherds  (No.  145)  at 
Budapest  is  painted  by  the  same  hand  as  this, 
also  the  two  Giorgione  landscapes  in  the  Uffizi 
and  the  school  piece.  No.  1173,  in  the  National 
Gallery,  London.  They  are  all  by  Romanino. 
Notice  the  mannerism  of  the  narrow,  cocked  eyes 
which  belongs  to  Romanino. 

142.  Girolamo  da  Carpi.  Opportunity  and  Patience. 
The  figure  is  not  convincing  as  to  its  lightness  or 
grace.  The  landscape  follows  Dossi  as  may  be 
seen  by  comparison  with  Nos.  126  and  128.  The 
canvas  injured. 

144.   Judith.    The  figure  is  heavy.     At  one  time 

the  picture  was  thought  to  be  by  Dossi.  The  land- 
scape as  in  No.  142.     Hurt  by  repainting. 

1338a  \  Goyen,  Jan  van.     Landscapes.    Several  of  these 
1338c  J  landscapes  by  Van  Goyen,  notably   1338a  and 


164  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

1338b,  are  charming  in  their  grey-green  monotone 
or  their  warm  browns.  His  olive  green  trees  with 
their  peculiar  drawing  of  the  foliage,  his  sky  and 
water  are  always  more  or  less  mannered  and  were 
easily  followed  (though  at  a  distance)  by  his  pupil 
Salomon  van  Ruysdael.  There  is  a  fine  tone  about 
his  pictures  and  a  decorative  feeling.  They  hold 
their  place  well  on  the  wall. 

276.  Greco,  II  (Domenico  Theotocopuli).  Healing 
the  Blind.  Not  a  remarkable  work  in  any  way, 
but  probably  by  II  Greco.  The  Christ  at  the  left, 
with  the  foreshortened  head  and  the  tall  figure, 
shows  the  master  in  his  early  manner  when  he 
was  taking  an  influence  not  so  much  from  Titian  or 
Tintoretto  as  from  Leandro  Bassano.  This  is  ap- 
parent not  only  in  types  and  drawing  but  in  col- 
ours, especially  in  a  certain  apple-green  peculiar 
to  Leandro  which  II  Greco  appropriated.  The  fact 
that  this  picture  was  long  attributed  to  Leandro 
Bassano  instead  of  to  II  Greco  points  to  the  re- 
semblances in  their  works. 

601a.  Guardi,  Francesco.  Pius  VI  Blessing  the 
Venetians,  A  picture  interesting  in  subject  to 
those  who  know  their  Venice  well.  The  painter 
took  some  liberties  with  his  text,  however.  There 
are  several  versions  of  this  same  subject.  It  is 
doubtful  that  this  is  the  original. 

1158 1  Gysels,    Pieter.      Landscape    with    Cattle.     Very 

1159/ attractive  little  pictures  done  in  the  style  of  Jan 

Brueghel  the  Elder  whom  Gysels  followed. 

1358.  Hals,  Frans.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  Small  in  size 
but  effective  in  its  breadth  and  grasp.  The  figure 
is  restful  though  the  coat  is  not.  It  breaks  in 
sharp  angles.     The  surface  is  easily  painted  but 


HOBBEMA,  MEINDERT  165 

not  precisely  in  the  style  of  Hals.  It  is  hardly 
Hals  at  his  best  and  perhaps  not  the  elder  Hals 
at  all.  Dirck  Hals  painted  just  such  figures  in 
schemes  of  black,  white,  and  grey. 

1359.   Portrait  of  a  Man,     It  is  not  as  certain  in  its 

drawing  and  handling  as  No.  1358  and  might  have 
been  done  by  a  pupil  or  follower  of  Hals.  Notice 
the  ruff,  the  hair,  and  the  drawing  of  the  face. 
Neither  portrait  gives  us  much  idea  of  Frans  Hals. 
He  painted  figures  with  more  of  the  third  dimen- 
sion about  them. 

1371.    Heda,  Willem  Claesz.     StilULife.    In  the  matter 

of  textures  and  surfaces,  what  could  be  more  real- 

te  istic  than  this?    It  is  a  surface  art  but  of  much 

^  skill  and  cleverness.     As  decoration,  it  counts  for 

little. 

1225.  Heem,  Cornells  de.  Still-Life.  A  good  piece 
of  painting  if  somewhat  shallow  in  its  petty  detail 
of  snails  and  water-drops.  But  there  never  has 
been  a  time  when  the  tear,  the  water-drop,  and  the 
fly  in  art  lacked  their  admirers. 

1595.  Heist,  Bartholomeus  van  der.  Portrait  of  Wife 
of  Andriea  Bicker.  A  good,  substantial  portrait, 
somewhat  hard  in  drawing  as  in  texture  and  a 
little  over-cleaned,  but  honest  and  forceful.  No. 
1596  is,  perhaps,  less  interesting — the  green  curtain 
being  disturbing. 

1664a.  Hobbema,  Meindert.  Water-Mill.  It  is  spotty 
in  the  lights  upon  the  leaves  and  is  not  very  good 
in  unity  of  effect  or  in  colour. 

1665.    Road   between   Dwellings  and   Trees.     A   fine 

little  landscape  warm  in  tone  and  good  in  the  sky. 
The  trees  are  angleworm-like  in  the  forms  of  the 


166  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

branches — the  branches  being  painted  in  after  (and 
on  top  of)  the  foliage. 

1889.  Holbein  the  Younger,  Hans.  Sir  Thomas  God' 
salve  and  His  Son,  Two  red-nosed  people,  prob- 
ably of  Holbein's  creation,  but  by  no  means  as 
strong  in  characterisation  and  drawing  as  some  other 
of  his  portraits.  The  flesh-red  of  these  faces  is 
like  that  of  No.  586d  in  the  Berlin  Gallery  and  is, 
perhaps,  as  indicative  of  the  copyist,  as  seen  in  the 
Burgoftiaster  Meyer  Madonna  near  at  hand  (No. 
1892),  as  of  Holbein.  Notice  the  slightly  drawn 
hands.     Somewhat  repainted. 

1890.    Portrait    of   Morett    the    Goldsmith,     A    fine 

**       example  of  Holbein's  more  elaborate  art.     Notice 

the  details  of  dress,  chain,  glove,  hand,  beard.  It 
is  absolute  in  its  truth  of  drawing  and  texture. 
And,  for  all  its  minute  workmanship,  the  picture 
does  not  lose  in  bulk  or  appear  trifling  or  finical. 
It  seems  astonishing  that  in  a  picture  of  this  size 
this  small  work  does  not  become  petty.  A  curtain 
shuts  out  the  background  and  seems  obtrusive; 
but  then  the  picture  was  always  lacking  in  the 
third  dimension — depth.  Notice  the  grey  flesh  of 
the  face  and  then  compare  it  with  the  red  faces 
in  the  copy  of  the  Burgomaster  Meyer  Madonna 
hanging  next  to  it.  The  Holbein  flesh  is  not  always 
the  congested  red  seen  in  No.  1889.  Notice  the 
hand — that  excellent  hand!  Once  attributed  to 
Leonardo  da  Vinci! 

1892.  Holbein  the  Younger,  Hans  (after).  Madonna 
of  the  Burgomaster  Meyer.  This  is  a  copy  after 
the  Darmstadt  picture,  but  interesting  to  study 
even  though  a  copy.  It  lacks  in  quality  and  force 
but  gives  the  composition  and  drawing  right  enough. 


JORDAENS,  JAKOB  167 

The  Madonna  and  Child  are  a  little  pretty  and 
perhaps  overdone  in  sentiment,  as  also  the  two 
children  below,  but  the  Burgomaster  is  a  fine  type 
as  are  the  women  of  his  family  on  the  opposite  side. 
The  carpet  is  annoying  in  its  tricky  wrinkle. 

839.  Isenbrant,  Adriaen.  The  Magdalen.  This  pic- 
ture could  not  with  reason  be  given  to  Gerard 
David  and  so  it  has  been  given,  with  some  stretch 
of  the  imagination,  to  his  shadowy  pupil  Isen-^ 
brant.  It  has  a  David  look  about  it  and  is  prob- 
ably by  some  one  in  his  school,  but  why  Isenbrant? 
When  you  find  a  painter's  name  in  an  old  register, 
is  that  sufficient  to  give  you  superior  knowledge  of 
his  artistic  style  and  enable  you  to  select  his  pic- 
tures from  hither  and  yon?  It  would  seem  so 
from  the  conclusions  of  certain  experts.  Notice  in 
this  picture  the  head-dress,  the  green  ground,  and 
also  the  sentiment. 

1805.  Jongh,  Ludolf.  Mother  and  Daughter.  What 
very  simple  and  direct  Dutch  portraiture!  There 
is  no  thought  here  of  anything  but  the  truth  of  the 
sitters'  appearance — the  truth  of  representation. 
How  very  straightforward  and  frank  these  people 
are!  Look  at  them  a  moment — their  faces,  hands, 
clothes — and  then  look  at  the  simple  background. 

L009.    Jordaens,    Jakob.      Ariadne     and    Bacchus.      A 

large  and  rather  coarse  Jordaens — not  coarse  in 
subject  but  in  the  painting  of  it.  The  grouping, 
with  the  light  flesh  of  the  women  in  the  centre  and 
the  mounting  up  of  nude  figures  in  the  form  of  a 
pyramid,  is  well  done  and  the  drawing  of  the  large, 
lumpy  figures  is  very  good.  The  colour  lacks  vital- 
ity for  all  its  warmth.    The  picture  is  not  nearly 


168  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

so  satisfactory  as  the  Fecundity  (No.  235)  at 
Brussels.     The  fruit  is  possibly  by  another  hand. 

1011.   The  Prodigal  Son.     This  picture  has  the  snap 

of  colour  and  light  in  it  that  No.  1009  lacks,  though 
here  we  meet  with  another  difficulty  in  wandering 
composition  and  rambling  drawing.  It  is,  how- 
ever, very  decisively  painted.  And  what  a  good 
glimpse  of  distant  landscape  off  at  the  right! 

1012.    Presentation  in  the  Temple.     As  a  matter  of 

church  art — an  altar-piece,  perhaps — this  is  hardly 
successful.  It  is  a  little  heavy  in  spirit  and  prosaic 
in  treatment.  See  how  much  more  life  No.  1010 
has  about  it. 

1010.    Diogenes   with    the  Lantern.     The   hght   and 

colour  of  it  are  excellent  and  the  handling  of  it 
spirited  for  Jordaens.  The  canvas,  however,  is 
too  full  of  figures  and  miscellaneous  plunder,  and 
the  drawing  is  exaggerated.  Notice,  for  instance, 
the  ropy  wrinkles  upon  the  figure  of  Diog:enes; 
But  there  is  sparkling  light  in  the  picture  that 
gives  it  life. 

1258.    Knupfer,  Nicolaus.     The  Painter's  Family.    Why 

*  is  it  not  well  done  all  through,  from  floor  to  ceil- 
ing, figures  included?  The  drawing  is  excellent 
and  the  colour  is  no  less  so.  How  well  the  chil- 
ren  are  drawn  and  painted!  How  well  that  bit  of 
white  is  used!  And  what  can  be  said  in  dispraise 
of  the  table-cloth,  the  costumes,  the  floor?  Often 
there  are  painters  quite  unknown  to  fame  who  pop 
up  with  an  excellent  picture  to  make  us  wonder 
why  they  did  not  do  more  of  them. 

1612a.     Koninck,    Philips.     Holland  Landscape.     It   is 
crudely  done  in  the  clouds,  the  foliage,  the  fore- 


MALER  VON  ULM,  HANS  169 

ground,  and  is  so  poor  an  example  of  Koninck  as 
to  make  one  almost  doubt  its  genuineness.  And 
yet  it  has  all  the  earmarks  of  Koninck's  work. 

1589a.  Koninck,  Salomon.  An  Astronomer.  It  might 
at  one  time  have  been  catalogued  as  a  Rembrandt 
though  its  weakness  is  very  apparent.  The  colour 
is  a  little  like  Rembrandt  in  his  grey  period  though 
darker  and  with  blackish  shadows. 

1589.   The  Hermit,    A  washed-out  performance,  weak 

in  every  way.  Even  the  emphasised  wrinkles  in 
the  forehead,  with  the  hand,  nose,  and  beard,  lack 
force  and  accent.  But  it  is  much  admired  by  the 
tourist. 

1582.  Lievens,  Jan.  An  Old  Man,  Here  is  another 
Rembrandt  follower  and  imitator.  His  works  un- 
der his  own  name  are  scarce,  and  it  is  not,  perhaps, 
an  error  to  think  that  some  of  them  are  still  under 
Rembrandt's  name.  See  the  comment  upon  his 
works  under  Rembrandt  in  The  Hague  notes  of  thia 
series. 

194a.  Lotto,  Lorenzo.  Madonna  and  Child  with  St, 
*  John,  An  attractive  picture,  not  only  in  its  senti- 
ment, which  is  so  intense  that  it  is  almost  strained, 
but  also  in  its  unusual  scheme  of  colour.  Lotto  is 
here  apparent  in  a  beguiling,  winning  mood.  Per- 
haps both  the  colour  and  the  mood  incline  to  sweet- 
ness but  stop  before  they  reach  sentimentality. 
The  handling  is  smooth  and  (under  the  glass)  too 
porcelain-like.  The  lilacs,  blues,  and  reds  are 
lovely  in  tone  but  possibly  a  little  cloying.  A 
landscape  to  correspond. 

1901.    Maler  von  Ulm,  Hans.     Portrait  of  a  Man,    A 

good  portrait— ^direct,  honest,  simple.    The  out- 


170  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

line  of  the  figure  cuts  against  the  crude  green  ground 
rather  sharply.  See  also  No.  1902. 
51.  Mantegna,  Andrea.  Holy  Family.  It  belongs, 
*  as  the  catalogue  states,  to  the  "late  Mantuan 
period'*  of  Mantegna  and  is  in  colour  brighter 
than  No.  29  in  the  Berlin  Gallery,  which  it  resem- 
bles in  a  measure.  It  is  excellent  in  drawing  and 
superb  in  characterisation.  The  Madonna  type 
seems  still  Bellinesque,  the  parents  of  the  Virgin 
at  the  back  are  very  forceful,  and  the  Child  is 
graceful  in  pose.  The  drapery  is  a  little  liny.  To 
be  compared  with  the  two  pictures  in  the  Louvre 
(Nos.  1375,  1376)  in  the  matter  of  grace  of  form. 
The  latter  are  far  beyond  this,  but  this  points  the 
way  for  them.  The  colour  is  superb  in  reds, 
oranges,  and  greens,  but  again  the  Louvre  pic- 
tures are  the  brighter.  All  three  are  "late"  Man- 
tegnas  and  of  much  excellence.  This  picture  has 
been  injured  by  cleaning. 

Master  of  the  Death  of  the  Virgin.    See  Cleve, 
Juste  van. 

123.  Mazzolino,  Ludovico.  Christ  Presented  to  the 
People,  The  colours  are  given  in  sharp  contrast 
to  the  architecture,  being  warm  reds,  while  the 
architecture  is  cold,  frozen,  ice-like.  The  picture 
is  not  a  good  one  for  Mazzolino. 

1736.  MetSU,  Gabriel.  The  Lady  with  Lace  Pillow. 
Very  nice  in  textures,  simple  in  the  composition, 
good  in  atmosphere.  It  just  falls  short  of  being  a 
Terborch  in  quality.  The  colour  wants  in  snap 
but  is  nevertheless  charming.  The  drawing  is 
right  all  through. 

1732.   The  Lovers.    A  very  good  piece  of  painting 

and  excellent  in  colour.    Metsu  is  not  to  be  classed 


MORO,  ANTONIO  171 

with  Netscher  and  Mieris.  He  comes  nearer  to 
ranking  with  Terborch  and  is  at  times  almost  his 
equal. 

1315.    Mierevelt,     Michiel     Jansz.     Man's     Portrait, 

Precise  and  smooth.  A  little  retouched  and  not 
wonderful  in  any  way.  It  is,  however,  an  example 
of  that  good  quality  of  portrait  work  which  all  the 
Dutch  painters  turned  out. 

1316  1  Portraits  of  a  Man  and  Woman,     The  man's 

1317  J  portrait  is  better  than  the  woman's.     Both  are 

precise  and  tight  in  their  workmanship.  No  doubt 
they  came  out  of  the  Mierevelt  picture  factory, 
but  whether  or  not  by  the  master's  own  hand  is 
not  easily  determined. 

1742.  Mieris,  Frans  van  (the  Elder).  Young  Woman 
Receiving  a  Love^Letter.  This  is  comparable  to 
the  art  of  Dou  or  Netscher.  It  is  in  the  same  vein 
and  corresponds  in  its  lack  of  intrinsic  art  value, 
though  it  shows  good  workmanship  and  some  col- 
our sense. 

201.  Morando  Paolo  (II  Cavazzola).  Portrait  of  a 
Man.  The  sleeves  remind  one  vaguely  of,  say, 
Antonio  Moro,  or  Holbein.  Somewhat  preten- 
tious as  portraiture  and  a  little  pinched  in  drawing. 
It  shows  a  strong  enough  type  but  is  weak  in  it- 
self— has  a  weak  spirit,  and  is  painted  with  a  care- 
ful but  weak  brush.  There  is  a  feeling  of  Caroto 
about  it — Caroto  not  at  his  best,  perhaps. 

847.  Moro,  Antonio.  Portrait  of  a  Canon,  A  fine, 
strong  head,  done  precisely,  truthfully,  but  with 
no  triviality  or  pettiness.  Notice  the  drawing  in 
the  eyes,  nose,  and  cheeks.  There  is  no  particular 
reason  why  it  should  be  put  down  to  Moro.     It  has 


172  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

features  that  suggest  Scorel.  Once  attributed  to 
Holbein. 
703b.  Murillo,  Bartolome  Esteban.  Death  of  St. 
Clara.  The  picture  is  rather  impressive  at  first 
glance,  but  further  inquiry  discloses  it  as  wanting 
in  good  drawing,  colour,  and  atmospheric  setting. 
Also  the  figures  in  white  in  the  back  row  are  not 
in  value  and  the  figures  in  the  foreground  stand  out 
too  much.  Moreover,  the  whites  are  not  well  seen 
or  well  handled  and  are  wanting  in  quality — that 
quality  which  whites  are  strikingly  susceptible  of 
in  the  hands  of  genius.  The  central  figure  near 
the  bed  is  not  lacking  in  grace  but  fails  to  unite 
the  two  sides  of  the  picture.  The  figures  at  the 
right  from  which  she  came  are  not  related  or  in 
harmony  with  the  shadowed  figures  at  the  left. 
As  for  the  background,  it  is  neither  smoke  nor 
cloud.  Finally,  the  spirit  of  the  scene  seems  weak 
as  though  the  painter  were  lacking  in  mental 
stamina.  It  is  an  early  Murillo  and  hurt  by  re- 
painting. 

704.   St.  Rodriguez.    The  large  figure  is  no  stronger  I 

than  the  small  angel  leaning  out  of  the  sky.  The 
robe  and  its  embroidery  are  not  badly  given,  and 
the  colour  is  acceptable  though  lacking  in  fine 
quality. 

705.    Madonna    and    Child.     A    good    example    of 

Murillo's  popular  pictures.  They  are  popular 
largely  because  they  are  pretty.  The  spirit  here 
is  sweet,  and  the  drawing  and  ccJour  ai'e  sweet, 
also.     Somewhat  repainted. 

1671.    Neer,   Eglon    Hendrik   van   der.     Lute-Player. 

What  a  pretty  right  hand  on  the  lute!  And  why 
is  the  picture  not  nice  in  colour  and  textures? 


PALMA  VECCHIO  173 

Perhaps  it  is  a  little  too  smooth  and  porcelain-like, 
but  there  is  considerable  skill  about  it,  if  not  a 
Terborch  quality. 

1347  1  NetSCher,  Caspar.  Interiors  with  Figures,  Good 
1351  j  examples  of  Netscher's  small,  smooth,  not  to  say 
smart,  workmanship.  The  textures  are  overdone, 
and  the  surfaces  point  the  way  to  the  glittering 
superficialities  of  Van  der  Werff  and  Philip  van 
Dyck.  No.  1353  is  so  good  that  one  might  doubt 
if  Netscher  ever  saw  it,  yet  sometimes  he  did  just 
such  excellent  work. 

811.  Orley,  Bernard  van.  Portrait  of  a  Man,  It  con- 
tains careful  drawing  and  cost  the  painter  some 
labour,  and  yet  there  is  no  very  striking  effect. 
It  is  a  little  soft,  both  mentally  and  technically. 
Formerly  attributed  to  Holbein  and  now  doubt- 
fully to  Van  Orley. 

810.   Holy  Family,    A  smooth  picture  (made  more 

smooth  by  being  placed  under  glass)  with  Renais- 
sance architecture  and  a  rather  good  landscape. 
The  head  of  Joseph  is  fairly  good,  the  Madonna  a 
little  affected,  the  angel  naive.  Carefully  but 
timidly  done.     It  may  be  a  copy. 

1398.    Ostade,  Adriaen  van.     Peasants  in  an  Interior. 

Very  good  in  drawing,  simple  in  colour  scheme, 
excellent  in  textures,  broad  and  effective  in  its 
painting.  A  little  smooth,  perhaps,  and  not  so 
certain  as  Brouwer  but  very  good  work.  See  also 
No.  1397. 

188.    Palma     Vecchio.     Madonna,     Child,     and     Two 

*      Saints,    It  belongs  to  the  earlier  time  of  the  master 

and  is  very  good  in  colour.     The  hills,  sky,  and 

clouds  are  perhaps  crude.     The  group  is  well  bal- 


174  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

anced  and  the  Madonna  is  lovely  in  tenderness. 
The  picture  has  been  injured  by  cleaning. 

189.    The    Three  Sisters.     Large  Palmesque  types 

**      with  full,  free  draperies,  small  hands,  finely  cut 

features,  rounded  contours,  large  forms.  Very 
beautiful  in  the  colour  of  the  robes  and  in  the  fine 
landscape.  Unfortunately,  the  picture  has  been 
dulled  in  the  flesh-notes  by  too  much  cleaning. 
The  necks  and  shoulders  are  flat  as  the  result  of 
the  modelling  having  been  rubbed  away.  The 
sister  at  the  right  has  been  hurt  in  the  neck  and 
cheek;  the  one  at  the  left  in  the  mouth,  nose,  and 
eye.  There  has  been  repainting  here  also.  What 
beautiful  blues,  reds,  and  browns!  The  best 
Palma  in  the  gallery,  and  one  of  the  best  in  exist- 
ence.    Done  in  Palma's  middle  period. 

190.  Venus,  Not  SO  pleasing  in  line  nor  so  dis- 
tinguished in  type  as  the  Giorgione  Venus  near  at 
hand,  though  it  (the  Palma)  is  too  much  repainted 
to  judge  of  its  one-time  merits.  The  quality  of  the 
flesh-notes  seems  entirely  gone.  It  has  been  super- 
seded by  something  that  looks  like  mere  whitish 
paint.  The  landscape  is  now  the  best  part  of  the 
picture.  The  figure  still  has  grace  and  charm 
about  it,  but  its  colour  and  surface  have  vanished. 
It  never  could  have  possessed  the  refinement  of 
the  Giorgione  Venus. 

191.  Holy  Family  with  St,  Catherine.  Very  inter- 
esting in  its  balanced  composition,  the  swinging 
lines  of  the  women,  and  their  fine  colour.  It  is  a 
late  work,  and  the  figure  of  Joseph  and  the  chil- 
dren have  a  Lottesque  look  about  them.  It  is,  all 
told,  the  second  best  Palma  in  this  gallery.  The 
flesh  and  draperies  have  been  much  cleaned  and 


♦ 


PIERO  DI  COSIMO  175 

somewhat  repainted,  especially  in  the  hands  of 
St.  Catherine  and  St.  Joseph.  There  is  beautiful 
colour  in  St.  Catherine's  robe  and  the  landscape 
is  very  good.  Joseph  and  the  children  are  Jewish 
in  type.  This  was  also  characteristic  of  Lotto,  as 
shown  in  his  Woman  Taken  in  Adultery  (No.  1349) 
in  the  Louvre.  The  landscape  suggests  resem- 
blances to  that  of  the  Louvre  Rustic  Concert  by 
Giorgione. 

-Jacob  and  Rachel,    With  the  exception  of  the 


two  central  figures,  it  is  a  poor  affair.  The  land- 
scape with  the  recurrent  lines  of  hills,  the  trees, 
cattle,  and  sky  are  coarsely  and  crudely  done  as 
though  some  weak  follower  rather  than  iPalma  were 
handling  the  brush.  Compare  it  with  the  landscape 
in  No.  189.  The  picture  is  not  good  for  Palma  in 
light,  colour,  or  drawing  and  is  quite  down  to  the 
level  of  Cariani  or  Bonifazio.  At  one  time  it  was 
thought  to  be  by  Giorgione.  It  is  proper  to  say, 
however,  that  the  surface  is  much  hurt  by  repaint- 
ing, and  it  is  not  just  to  Palma  (or  Cariani,  either) 
to  judge  him  by  its  present  condition.  Notice  for 
repainting  the  hands  and  necks  of  Jacob  and  Rachel, 
also  the  man  seated  at  the  left.  The  brush-work 
is  not  now  "broad"  but  simply  ineffective.  It  is 
probably  a  genuine  Palma  but  a  poor  one.  Morelli, 
however,  calls  it  "  an  exquisite  idyll.'* 

42.  Palmezzano,  Marco.  Adoration  of  Kings.  No- 
tice it  as  a  modern  forgery,  as  the  catalogue  sug- 
gests. It  is  probably  kept  on  the  wall  as  an  awful 
example. 

20.    Piero  di  Cosimo.     Holy  Family  and  Angels,     A 

*     tondo  in  which  Piero  shows  that  he  knows  how  to 
fill  a  round  space  with  figures  just  as  well  as  his 


176  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

companions.  The  drawing  is  harsh,  almost  sav- 
age, but  is  effective  in  producing  a  large  grace  in  the 
Madonna  with  a  smoother  effect  in  the  children 
and  angels  at  the  top — the  angels  being  especially 
charming.  The  colour  is  good  and  the  picture  is 
in  tone  throughout.     The  landscape  is  effective. 

41.    Pinturicohlo,  Bernardo.    Portrait  of  a  Boy,    A 

*  work  in  tempera,  charming  in  its  frankness  and 
in  its  straightforward  method.  It  is  very  simply 
done — done  with  the  definite  aim  of  giving  the 
truth  but  giving  it  gracefully.  What  a  boyish 
boy,  full  of  sincerity  and  even  dignity!  He  is 
quite  unconscious  of  how  well  he  carries  himself. 
And  what  a  charming  landscape  at  the  back!  The 
colour  looks  a  little  washed  out  by  comparison  with 
the  oil-paintings  about  it  and  the  flesh-notes  have 
now  an  undertone  of  green.  A  work  of  truth  and 
character.  But  why  Pinturicchio?  It  is  nearer 
Perugino. 

102.  Piombo,  Sebastiano  deL  Christ  Bearing  the 
Cross,  It  shows  the  influence  of  Michelangelo  in 
the  hands  and  drapery,  of  Giorgione  in  the  helmet 
and  the  shadowed  landscape.  There  are  other  ver- 
sions of  this  picture  at  Madrid  and  St.  Petersburg. 
It  is  not  possible  now  to  say  which  is  the  original 
work. 

1390.    Poorter,  Willem  de.      Christ  and  the  Adulteress. 

It  is  in  the  small,  smooth  style  of  Poorter  but 
should  be  studied  because  this  same  style  makes  its 
appearance  in  pictures  of  this  class  attributed  to 
Rembrandt  in  European  galleries — notably  in  The 
Hague  Museum,  and  the  National  Gallery,  Lon- 
don.    See  also  No.  1389. 


PREVITALI,  ANDREA  177 

^91.    Presentation    in    the   Temple.     Said    to    be    a 

copy  by  Poorter  after  the  original  Rembrandt  in 
The  Hague.  But  is  The  Hague  picture  an  orig- 
inal Rembrandt  or  an  original  Poorter?  Neither 
this  picture  nor  that  is  of  Rembrandt  mind  or 
hand.  They,  in  company  with  a  similar  picture 
in  the  London  National  Gallery  (No.  45),  are 
probably  all  by  some  weak  Rembrandt  follower  of 
the  Poorter  kind.  Look  at  it  closely  and  the  whole 
conception  (aside  from  the  copy)  will  appear  too 
merely  pretty  for  Rembrandt. 

)29.  Potter,  Paulus.  Cattle.  Very  good  in  the  cattle 
seen  under  broken  and  shadowed  light.  The  shad- 
ows, atmosphere,  and  sky  are  all  good.  This  is  an 
exceptional  Potter  though  by  no  means  a  wonder. 
It  lacks  in  colour  and  is  immature  in  spots. 

)30.  Resting  Herd.  This  is  painting  of  a  very  medi- 
ocre quality.  The  brush  is  rasping,  the  surface 
unpleasant,  the  decorative  quality  quite  wanting. 
The  foliage  spread  against  the  sky,  and  the  sheep, 
illustrate  this. 

^2L  Poussin,  Nicolas.  Reclining  Venus.  Poussin  is, 
perhaps,  seen  at  his  best  in  the  Louvre,  but  there  are 
a  number  of  his  works  in  this  Dresden  Gallery  that 
might  be  noticed.  This  Venus  is,  perhaps,  as  good 
as  his  average  and  is  graceful  in  line  if  slight  in 
form.  The  figure  makes  a  handsome  spot  of  light 
in  the  centre  of  the  composition.  See  also  No.  722 
for  graceful  figures.  The  colour  is  usually  too  hot 
(as  in  No.  717),  and  the  cold  blues  fail  to  temper  it. 

60.  Previtali,  Andrea.  Madonna,  Child,  and  St. 
John.  A  pretty  Madonna,  somewhat  cold  in  col- 
our, with  a  carefully  painted   landscape   and  a 


*** 


178  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

castle  in  the  distance.  It  is  much  cleaned,  espe- 
cially in  the  St.  John  at  the  right  with  the  very 
flat  side  face. 
93.  Raphael  Sanzio.  The  Sistine  Madonna,  This  is 
probably  the  best-known  picture  in  the  world.  It 
is  the  most  important  of  RaphaeFs  Madonnas  and 
in  its  present  placing  an  excellent  illustration  of 
the  sad  favour  to  which  the  church  art  of  Italy 
has  come.  It  was  originally  painted  for  the 
Church  of  San  Sisto  at  Piacenza  and  in  that 
church  was  placed  over  the  high  altar  in  full  view 
of  the  kneeling  worshippers.  The  Madonna  with 
the  Child  in  her  arms  is  shown  coming  forward  on 
the  clouds  to  meet  the  congregation.  She  is  hold- 
ing up  the  Child  to  them  as  the  Light  and  Salva- 
tion of  the  World.  A  cherub  throng  in  a  golden 
halo  is  back  of  her.  Two  of  the  cherubs  have  ar- 
rived before  her  and  are  resting  their  elbows  on 
the  actual  altar  top.  The  altar-piece  curtains  are 
drawn  apart.  San  Sisto  (Pope  Sixtus  II),  the 
patron  saint  of  the  church,  his  papal  crown  resting 
on  the  altar,  is  kneeling  on  the  clouds,  not  "com- 
mending himself,"  as  your  Baedeker,  quoting  a  com- 
patriot, has  it;  but  with  one  hand  on  his  bosom 
and  the  other  pointing  out  to  the  kneeling  worship- 
pers he  is  saying  as  plainly  as  possible:  "Not  for 
me!  not  for  me!  but  for  these  poor  people  in  my 
care." 

As  a  part  of  worship,  as  a  matter  of  religious  be- 
lief, as  an  engine  of  the  church  in  teaching  the  faith, 
this  picture  in  its  original  setting  must  have  been 
powerful  and  impressive.  Raphael  designed  it  for 
that  purpose  and  for  that  place.  Taking  it  away 
from  the  Church  of  San  Sisto  destroyed  its  signifi- 
cance as  religion  and  its  meaning  as  art.     In  the 


RAPHAEL  SANZIO  179 

small,  square  room  of  the  Dresden  Gallery  the  beau- 
tiful Madonna,  Child  in  arms,  now  walks  down  upon 
the  clouds  to  meet,  not  a  believing  throng  upon 
its  knees  praying  for  intercession  and  help,  but  a 
miscellaneous  throng  of  tourists  who  are  standing 
about  and  for  the  most  part  making  foolish  re- 
marks about  the  picture.  Usually  some  one  is 
deprecating  in  a  loud  whisper  the  fad  about  the  old 
masters  and  is,  perhaps,  declaring  with  vast  super- 
fluity that  "  he  does  not  understand  these  old  Ma- 
donna pictures."  No,  he  does  not — more's  the 
pity.  And,  to  tell  the  bald  truth,  the  picture  has 
little  meaning  where  it  is  placed.  Even  the  look 
of  it  is  greatly  distorted.  The  glaring  side  windows 
throw  the  worst  possible  light  upon  it  and  make  the 
colour  look  even  cruder  than  it  is.  It  was  originally 
laid  in  by  Raphael  with  bright  colours  that  it  might 
hold  at  a  distance  in  a  dimly  lighted  church. 

Technically,  the  picture  is  not  painted  in  a  posi- 
tive or  a  final  manner.  Raphael  as  a  painter  never 
came  to  maturity  in  the  Titian-Velasquez  sense. 
The  Sistine  Madonna  is  little  more  than  a  beautiful 
drawing  filled  in  with  agreeable  but  rather  thin 
colour.  It  is  a  pyramidal  composition,  the  apex  of 
the  pyramid  being  the  Madonna's  head  and  the  side 
lines  leading  down  to  the  saints  at  right  and  left. 
The  curtains  at  the  top  fill  in  the  upper  spaces;  the 
altar  and  the  cherubs  help  out  at  the  bottom.  The 
figure  of  the  Madonna  is  hardly  that  of  a  Greek  Vic- 
tory nor  even  so  select  in  proportions  as  the  Gior- 
gione  Sleeping  Venus  in  a  near  room.  It  is  rather 
squared  by  the  puff-out  of  the  drapery  but  has 
excellent  movement,  and  is  quite  above  reproach 
in  its  drawing.  Even  more  striking  in  drawing  is 
the  nude   Child — a  superb   effect.     The   look  of 


180  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

wonder  in  both  Mother  and  Child  was  produced 
by  making  their  eyes  large,  round,  and  wide  apart 
— something  Raphael  had  learned  from  Byzantine 
art.  The  draperies  are  not  only  very  large  and 
fine  in  drawing  but  very  effective  in  giving  the 
sense  of  motion.  San  Sisto  is  again  almost  fault- 
less in  drawing.  Notice  the  excellence  of  his  hands. 
St.  Barbara  at  the  right  shows  the  influence  of 
Leonardo  in  the  type.  Her  face  is  averted  from 
the  shining  vision,  as  though  the  light  were  blind- 
ing. Her  head  and  shoulders  are  well  given,  but 
the  left  hand  and  arm  are  somewhat  scant  and  un- 
convincing. The  cherubs  or  cupids  at  the  bottom 
(the  most  admired  feature  of  the  picture)  are  pulpy, 
heavy,  unsatisfactory,  and  somewhat  repainted. 
All  told,  this  is  a  masterpiece  of  drawing  and  de- 
sign— a  superb  picture,  out  of  place  and  misunder- 
stood even  by  professional  artists. 

1562.  Rembrandt  van  Ryn.  Saskia  with  the  Red 
*  Flower.  The  characterisation  is  charming,  the 
colour  rich,  the  shadow  masses  luminous  and  yet 
possessed  of  mystery.  The  hands  have  been  hurt 
but  are  still  lifelike.  The  shadow  about  the  head 
is  blistered  and  cracked,  the  fillet  has  been  retouched, 
the  hair  repainted,  the  face  and  mouth  tampered 
with,  but  Rembrandt  is  still  under  it.  Stand  back 
and  see  the  modelling  of  the  cheeks  and  chin.  No- 
tice how  different  the  colour  is  from  that  of  all  the 
Rembrandt  followers  in  depth  and  clarity. 

1557.  Portrait  of  William  Burggraeff.  This  is  cer- 
tainly a  Rembrandt  and  must  be  used  as  a  criterion 
of  his  early  work.  It  is  in  his  grey  period  and 
dated  1633.  Notice  the  clearness  of  the  flesh  tones, 
the  luminosity  of  the  grey  background,  the  draw- 


ee 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  181 

ing  and  modelling  of  the  mouth,  chin,  nose,  eyes. 
Somewhat  over-cleaned  but  a  very  good  portrait. 
It  has  simplicity,  solidity,  and  substance  about  it. 
The  collar  has  a  pattern  in  it  made  by  drawing 
through  the  wet  paint  with  the  wooden  end  of  the 
brush,  but  this  working  through  wet  paint  is  not 
the  same  performance  as  Lievens  shows  us  in  his 
work  upon  hair  and  beard. 

■Ganymede,    This  picture  has  long  been  ac- 


cepted as  a  Rembrandt  though  poor  enough  in 
colour  and  handling  to  be  by  some  one  of  his  school. 
It  belongs  to  the  so-called  grey  period,  but  the  grey 
is  more  like  that  in  No.  1559  than  in  No.  1557. 
It  is  thin  and  unsatisfactory,  let  the  indiscriminate 
admirers  of  alleged  Rembrandts  say  what  they 
may.  There  is  nothing  about  it  that  a  Bol  or  a 
Backer  could  not  have  done.  The  little  figure  is 
well  drawn  enough,  but  it  hardly  shows  Rembrandt's 
drawing.  The  more  one  studies  it  the  more  one 
doubts  it.  And  yet  one  cannot  deny  that  it  is 
Rembrandtesque. 

Saskia.    The  sitter  does  not  look  like  Saskia 

nor  the  work  like  that  of  Rembrandt.  It  is  utterly 
different,  both  as  regards  the  sitter  and  the  painter, 
from  the  Saskia  (No.  256)  at  Cassel,  and  yet  both 
were  supposed  to  be  painted  in  the  same  year. 
How  was  it  possible  for  Rembrandt  to  see  Saskia 
in  two  such  opposed  views?  Here  she  is  a  coarse, 
vulgar  little  fishwife;  there  she  is  very  much  of  a 
lady.  And  how  could  he  think  in  such  different 
terms  of  colour  or  light-and-shade  or  paint  with 
such  a  different  brush?  This  Dresden  picture  is 
too  small  in  mental  grasp  for  Rembrandt,  too 
pinched  and  spare  in  design,  too  bleached  in  the 


182  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

high  lights  of  the  colours.  Moreover,  neither  the 
high  lights  nor  the  deep  shadows  are  Rembrandt- 
esque  in  quality  or  touch.  It  is  a  good  picture  in 
itself,  but  it  has  not  the  mental  or  technical  grip 
of  the  master.  The  face  is  very  well  modelled 
and  easily  handled;  the  costume  is  less  certain  in 
touch.  It  is  possibly  by  some  follower  like  Poorter. 
Compare  Poorter's  alleged  copy  after  Rembrandt 
(No.  1391)  in  this  gallery  for  the  handling,  making 
allowance  for  this  being  a  large  picture  and  being 
brushed  in  larger  than  Poorter's  usual  work.  The 
faded  high  lights  also  suggest  Poorter. 

1559.   Rembrandt  and  Saskia,     This  is  perhaps  a 

genuine  Rembrandt,  but  it  is  not  the  great  affair 
it  was  one  time  thought  to  be.  It  is  a  little  thin 
in  light  and  also  in  the  shadows.  In  drawing  it  is 
by  no  means  positive,  and  in  colour  it  has  the  pallor 
of  a  Ferdinand  Bol.  The  background  of  peacock's 
feathers  is  poorly  done,  the  wall  does  not  recede, 
and  the  textures  are  not  very  convincing.  The 
picture  is  hurt  by  scrubbing  and  cleaning,  which 
may  account  for  its  weak  appearance.  It  is  a  grey- 
period  picture — Bol's  grey  period,  perhaps,  rather 
than  Rembrandt's. 

1560.    Samson's  Wedding  Feast,     The  types  at  the 

extreme  right  and  left  are  not  Rembrandt's,  nor 
is  the  general  scheme  of  light  his.  The  picture  is 
dated  1638  but  has  the  same  blues  as  the  alleged 
Saskia  (No.  1556)  of  1633.  It  is  probably  (but  not 
certainly)  by  the  same  hand  that  helped  Rembrandt 
with  the  six  pictures  of  the  Passion  at  Munich — 
that  is,  Eeckhout.  Of  course,  it  was  good  business 
to  have  Rembrandt's  name  on  it,  and  from  the 
number  of  falsely  signed  pictures  emanating  from 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  183 

the  Netherlands  we  know  that  the  Dutch  of  Rem- 
brandt's time  and  later  did  not  despise  the  business 
side  of  art.  It  is  a  fairly  good  picture,  though  it 
wanders  and  falls  out  at  the  left.  The  colour  is 
satisfactory. 

-Hunter  with  Bittern.     If  we  accept  No.  1557 


as  a  Rembrandt  standard,  then  this  picture  can 
hardly  be  said  to  live  up  to  it.  Examine  No.  1557 
closely  in  the  drawing  of  the  eyes  and  mouth, 
and  then  pass  immediately  to  the  eyes  and  mouth 
of  this  Bittern  Hunter  picture.  Is  not  the  weak 
drawing  and  painting  of  the  latter  instantly  ap- 
parent? Perhaps  repainted,  you  say?  Yes,  per- 
haps; but  other  things  in  the  picture  correspond 
to  such  palpable  defects  as  the  painting  of  the 
mouth.  The  shadow  on  the  face  is  somewhat  false 
in  value,  the  light  is  not  luminous,  the  figure  is  a 
guess,  the  hat  and  the  hair  are  fumbled.  The 
painting  of  the  bird  is  the  best  thing  in  the  picture. 
The  surface  is  somewhat  injured.  Yet,  with  these 
defects  noted,  it  still  shows  as  a  picture  of  some 
beauty  and  charm. 

-Manoah*8   Offering.     A  splendid  Rembrandt 


as  regards  the  figures  of  Manoah  and  his  wife. 
What  wonderful  types!  How  they  kneel!  How 
they  pray!  Manoah  is  leaning  over  as  though  to 
hear  what  his  wife  might  say,  but  she  is  absorbed 
and  wholly  unconscious.  How  real  and  true  they  are 
in  their  bulk  of  body,  their  weight,  their  attitudes, 
their  hands  clasped  in  prayer!  The  drawing  is 
large,  dealing  with  the  essentials  of  form  and  not 
bothering  about  petty  details.  And  what  glori- 
ous colour!  Rembrandt  never  went  beyond  that 
glowing  colour.    But  the  rest  of  the  picture  is 


184  THE.  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

more  or  less  of  a  drag  on  the  flight.    The  fire  throws 
-  a  glitter  on  the  robes  and  tries  to  hold  the  picture 

together;    but  the  angel  and  the  shadowy  back- 
'  ground  do  not  support  or  help   the   figures  and 

might  almost  as  well  have  been  omitted.  The  pic- 
ture, if  cut  down  to  the  two  figures,  would  lose 
'  little.  The  figures  themselves  are  superb — master- 
ful. Keep  this  colour  in  mind  in  looking  at  certain 
large  pictures  attributed  to  Rembrandt,  such  as 
the  Centurion  Cornelius,  in  the  Wallace  Collection. 
The  brush  and  palette  here  are  very  different  from 
there. 

1564.  *— — The  Gold  Weigher.  It  will  never  satisfy  any 
one  as   a  Rembrandt.     The  head-dress  alone  is 

:  suificient  to  condemn  it.  The  face  and  hands  are 
not  badly  done,  but  they  are  not  in  the  style  of 
Rembrandt;  and  the  colour  is  good,  but  again  it 
is  not  Rembrandtesque.  It  is  an  indifferent  school 
piece,  in  the  same  class  with  the  so-called  Rem- 
brandt Money  Changer  at  Berlin  (No*  828d). 

1565.  — -^-Portrait  of  a  Young  Warrior,  In  the  Rem- 
brandt vein  and  style  but  only  superficially  so.  It 
is  too  slight  and  weak.  Perhaps  it  is  a  copy  or, 
at  best,  only  a  school  piece.  It  might  have  been 
done  by  the  same  hand  that  did  the  Bittern  Hunter 
(No.  1561). 

1566.    Entombment.     A  school  copy  of  the  picture 

in  Munich  (No.  330),  with  an  indication  here  of 
how  much  the  Munich  picture  must  have  suffered 
by  cleaning  and  restoration.  This  copy  has  every 
look  of  having  been  done  by  the  painter  of  the 
Centurion  Cornelius  in  the  Wallace  Collection 
(No.  86),  the  Christ  before  Pilate  (No.  386)  at 
Budapest,  and  the  David  and  Saul  (No.  621)  at 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  "  185 

The  Hague.  The  painter  was  probably  Flinek,  but 
that  is  not  a  thing  one  can  state  with  certainty. 

Portrait  of  an  Old  Man.     An  excellent  head 

though  somewhat  puzzling  and  perplexing.  It  is 
much  kneaded  and  thumbed  in  the  face  and  beard 
and  is  rather  hot  in  colour  but  certainly  has 
strength  about  it.  Compare  it  with  No.  1557  for 
the  same  large  point  of  view  but  a  different  treat- 
ment of  the  surface,  possibly  due  to  Rembrandt's 
advanced  age  and  freer  hand.  It  was  painted  in 
1654.  Compare  it  again  with  No.  1570  for  the 
different  treatment  of  the  hat,  pearls,  and  under- 
dress,  as  also  the  illumination.  It  is  apparently  of 
Rembrandt  origin  but  not  too  certainly  by  his 
unaided  hand. 

— — Man  with  the  Red  Cap,  This  is  by  the  painter 
of  black  shadows  and  square  block  hands,  whose 
works  are  sometimes  confused  with  those  of  Rem- 
brandt. The  picture  is  well  done  in  the  face  and 
rather  strong  all  through,  but  it  has  not  the  Rem- 
brandt touch  or  quality.  The  scheme  of  light  and 
colour  is  also  too  dark,  too  blackish  for  him. 
Once  attributed  to  Fabritius,  to  whom  it  should 
be  restored.  It  fits  him  better  than  any  one  else. 
Compare  it  with  the  Fabritius  here  (No.  1591). 

Portrait  of  the  Artist,     Here,  again,  we  have 

the  square-block  hand  and  the  dirty,  non-luminous 
shadow.  The  face  is  as  broad  as  a  pan  and  with 
not  a  trace  of  Rembrandt's  hand  in  its  painting. 
Notice  the  squarely  drawn  eyes  and  mouth  and 
the  badly  done  ear.  It  is  now  somewhat  injured 
but  was  never  at  any  time  a  picture  by  Rembrandt.. 
It  is  the  heavy  work  of  a  pupil  trying  to  paint  a 
portrait  of  his  master,  perhaps,  or  that  studio 


186:  THE  DRESDEISI  QALLERY 

model  who  we  have  been  led  to  think  was  Rem- 
brandt himself.  Why  is  it  necessary  to  see  Rem- 
brandt's hand  in  all  these  thumbed  and  gummed 
canvases?  Did  his  pupils  never  grow  old,  never 
torture  their  canvases,  never  miss  their  drawing, 
never  indulge  in  glittering  high  lights?  Did  Rem- 
brandt possess  all  the  vices  as  well  as  virtues  of 
the  painter's  craft? 

1570.    Man  with   the  Pearls   in  His  Hat,     A  strong 

*       picture  but  not  very  characteristic  of  Rembrandt 

at  any  period  of  his  life.  The  shadows  are  too 
dark,  the  high  lights  too  bright  and  glittering,  the 
pearls  and  borders  of  the  dress  too  spotty.  It  is 
customary  to  put  down  these  pictures  with  pot- 
black  shadows,  glittering  high  lights,  and  messy 
surfaces  to  Rembrandt's  old  age,  but  they  do  not 
agree  in  any  way  with  such  a  portrait  as  No.  221 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London,  showing  Rem- 
brandt at  sixty.  The  surface  there  is  thumbed, 
and  the  colour  is  hot,  but  there  is  no  blackness,  no 
block-shaped  hands,  no  flare  of  spotty  lights.  But 
this  is  undeniably  a  strong  portrait,  and  Rem- 
brandt may  have  done  it. 

1571.  — —Old  Man  with  a  Stick,  A  gOod  picture,  but 
again  the  hands  and  shadows  are  not  convincingly 
like  Rembrandt,  and  the  hair  and  the  beard  are 
much  tortured  by  small  strokes  of  the  brush.  The 
cloak  and  hat  have  been  repainted,  as  the  catalogue 
intimates.  It  must  be  accepted  with  several  grains 
of  salt.  Compare  it  with  the  Koninck  here  (No. 
1589a). 

1573.  Rembrandt,  School  of.  Portrait.  A  very  good 
work  by  a  pupil  or  follower  not  to  be  named  with 
any  certainty.    It  has  a  suggestion  of  Aert  de 


RIBERA,  JUSEFE  187 

Gelder  about  it.  A  little  pulpy  in  the  face  but 
fairly  well  drawn  and  good  in  colour.  The  han- 
dling is  free  but  not  very  effective. 

1575.   Landscape,    With   a   blackish   thunder-cloud 

*  in  the  sky  peculiar  to  the  landscapes  of  Hercules 
Seghers.  A  strong  landscape  and  just  as  inter- 
esting as  those  put  down  directly  to  Rembrandt 
at  Cassel  and  elsewhere.  The  green  patches  on 
the  pattern  of  light  and  dark  are  very  effective. 
Thought  by  Dr.  Bode  and  others  to  be  by  Aert  de 
Gelder,  about  whose  landscape  performances  Uttle 
or  nothing  is  known.     It  is  nearer  to  Seghers. 

324.  Reni,  Guido.  Venus  and  Cupid.  A  better  pic- 
ture in  colour  and  tone  than  Guido  usually  painted 
but  weak  in  spirit  and  even  weaker  in  drawing  and 
modelling.  It  has  been  much  cleaned  and  re- 
painted. Many  pictures  belonging  to  the  late 
Bolognese  School  are  in  this  gallery,  but  they  are 
not  satisfactory  though  in  some  respects  fairly 
good  pieces  of  drawing  and  handling. 

323 1 Heads  of  Christ.    These  are  the  kind  of  pic- 

329  \  tures  that  Guido  did,  early,  late,  and  often.     They 

330  J  are  badly  drawn,  smoothly  painted,  with  cut-and- 

dried  sentiment.  The  eyes  of  No.  323  are  not  set 
in  the  head  but  in  the  cheek  and  could  not  look 
any  way  but  up.  Still,  people  will  love  such  pic- 
tures. The  Caracci  (No.  309)  is  much  better  but 
is  soft  and  pretty,  too. 

683.   Ribera,  Jusefe  (Lo  Spagnoletto).    St.  Agnes. 

A  more  graceful  affair  than  usual  with  Ribera. 
He  is  more  frequently  dark  in  spirit,  peculiarly 
Spanish  in  sentiment,  somewhat  tragic  and  for- 
bidding in  his  themes.    His  scheme  of  light  and 


188  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

dark  (derived  from  Caravaggio)  supplements  the 
darkness  of  his  spirit.  In  this  picture  he  is  inclined 
to  lightness  and  even  prettiness,  losing  something 
in  good  drawing  and  forceful  modelling. 

682.   Diogenes.    A  strong  head  at  the  top — that  is, 

about  the  forehead  and  eyes — but  a  weak  one  lower 
down,  under  the  beard.     See  also  No.  686. 

45  1  Roberti,  Ercole  de\     The  Betrayal  and  The  Way 

46  J  to  Calvary.    Two  panels  by  a  pupil  or  follower  of 

Tura.  The  third  panel  of  the  original  predella  is 
in  the  Royal  Institution,  Liverpool.  They  are  good 
in  tone  and  light,  sculpturesque  in  the  draperies, 
and  rather  harsh  in  the  drawing.  The  action  is 
right,  and  perhaps  the  best  part  of  them  is  the  col- 
our— the  rich,  fine  colour.  What  well-shown  rocks ! 
And  with  a  sky  that  has  light  in  it.  The  Christ 
and  sleeping  apostles  at  the  left  in  No.  46  suggest 
the  influence  of  Mantegna  or  Bellini  or  perhaps 
.         both. 

676.  Roelas,  Juan  de  las.  The  Conception.  Original 
and  unique  in  colour,  as  also  in  feeling.  It  is,  of 
course,  hard  in  the  drawing,  Roelas  being  some- 
thing of  an  early  realist.  He  followed  Tintoretto 
in  colour. 

103.  Romano,  Giulio.  Madonna  della  Catina.  This 
is  not  a  great  picture  in  itself,  but  it  is  an  important 
late  work  of  Giulio  Romano,  the  most  considerable 
of  Raphael's  pupils.  He  is  to  be  seen  completely 
only  in  Rome  and  Mantua  (Palazzo  del  Te).  The 
flesh  and  robes  here  are  bleached  in  the  high  lights 
after  the  late  Roman  manner.  The  picture  is  hurt 
by  repainting,  as  in  the  St.  Anne  at  the  left  and 
also  in  the  Madonna. 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  189 

1510a.  Rombouts,  Salomon.  Landscape.  A  fine,  warm- 
toned  landscape  with  a  strong  sky  and  clouds.  It 
has  much  force  about  it.  It  would  be  the  better 
if  the  little  tree  in  the  foreground  with  its  spotty 
foliage  were  out  of  the  picture.  Formerly  ascribed 
to  Decker.     It  shows  the  Ruisdael  influence. 

955.  Rubens,  Peter  Paul.     St.  Jerome.    This  is  an 

*  early  Rubens,  and  yet  it  bears  small  trace  of  any 
Italian  influence  save  in  method.  The  master  is 
a  true  Fleming  almost  from  the  beginning.  The 
drawing  and  handling  are  a  little  more  constrained 
than  later  on,  yet  both  are  simple  and  fluent. 
What  drawing  in  the  head,  shoulders,  and  fore- 
shortened hand!  What  colour — what  flesh  colour! 
Compare  it  with  the  Van  Dyck  of  the  same  subject 
(No.  1024),  and  see  the  note  on  the  Van  Dyck. 
Rubens  is  always  the  greater — he  says  things  more 
easily  and  simply  than  his  pupil.     A  little  hurt. 

956.    Victory  Crowning  a  Hero.     An  early  example 

*  of  Rubens,  done  probably  without  the  aid  of  pupils, 
with  sure  drawing,  fluid  handling,  fine  colour,  and 
excellent  textures.  Notice  the  fed-on-roses  flesh 
of  the  Victory,  the  red  shadows  of  the  flesh,  the 
twist  of  the  body,  and  its  fine  drawing.  The  hair 
and  wings  suggest  some  repainting.  Notice  further 
the  finely  modelled  back  of  the  seated  figure  at  the 
right  and  the  painting  of  the  golden  hair.  Another 
version  or  study  for  this  seated  figure  is  in  the 
Liechtenstein  Gallery  in  Vienna.  There  is  excel- 
lent texture  painting  in  the  armour.  And  what 
colour  in  the  shadow  under  the  red  robe  of  the  war- 
rior! The  spear  of  the  warrior  unfortunately  cuts 
the  composition  into  two  parts  and  breaks  the  unity 
of  the  group.     The  figures  at  the  right  hand  in 


190  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

shadow  are  empty  and  do  not  help  the  composi- 
tion. It  is  a  glowing  canvas.  At  Cassel  a  some- 
what similar  picture  (No.  91). 

957.    The  Drunken  Hercules,     An  early  example  of 

the  Bacchanalian  themes  often  repeated  in  the 
Rubens  shop.  The  theme  itself  may  be  repellent 
to  some,  but  how  well  it  is  realised,  how  truthfully 
drawn  and  painted!  Notice  how  closely  the  com- 
position is  knit  together — the  three  figures  making 
a  statuesque  oval  group.  And  notice  also  how  the 
swinging  lines  of  the  oval  help  out  and  accent  the 
swaying  movement  of  the  group.  It  is  something 
that  Rubens  designed  and  his  pupils  executed.  It 
does  not  show  Rubens's  own  handling.  Compare 
the  brush-work  with  that  in  No.  956. 

957a.    Satyr  and  Nymph  with  Fruit,     The  peculiar 

heat  here  shown  in  the  colour  of  the  faces  was 
more  characteristic  of  Jordaens  than  of  Rubens. 
But  this  pictiu*e  is  probably  some  school  replica. 
It  is  easily  done  but  not  precisely  as  Rubens  did 
things.  There  is  a  Jordaens  look  about  it  hard  to 
get  away  from. 

958.    Old  Woman  with  Brazier.     This  is  a  portion 

of  the  Brussels  picture,  Venus  at  the  Forge  of 
Vulcan  (No.  382),  which  was  sawed  off  and  is 
now  the  separate  picture  No.  958  here  at  Dresden. 
It  looks  as  though  it  had  been  done  by  Honthorst 
and  is  certainly  not  characteristic  of  Rubens,  save 
in  a  certain  liquid  way  of  handling  paint,  which 
he  imparted  to  the  whole  school. 

958a.    Last  Judgment.     Said   to   be   a   sketch   by 

Rubens  for  his  large  picture  at  Munich  (No.  735). 
It  is  apparently  not  a  copy  after  the  larger  picture, 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  191 

though  it  is  just  the  sort  of  thing  that  would  be 
copied  by  pupils  in  order  to  gain  knowledge  of  the 
figure.  It  has  the  appearance  of  a  sketch,  and 
that,  too,  by  Rubens's  own  hand. 

960.   Portrait  of  a  Man.     It  is  not  unlike  Nos.  1022, 

*  1023,  1023c,  and  1023d,  put  down  to  Van  Dyck 
— a  good,  straightforward  portrait,  but  obviously 
not  in  Rubens's  early  style  though  inclining  more 
to  Rubens  than  to  his  pupil.  There  is  some  con- 
fusion here  between  the  portraits  that  belong  to 
Rubens  and  those  that  belong  to  Van  Dyck.  The 
truth  is,  the  portraits  are  not  markedly  character- 
istic of  either  painter,  and  yet  they  lie  somewhere 
between  the  two,  unless  we  postulate  a  third 
painter  at  present  unknown  to  us.  In  either  or 
any  event,  they  are  fairly  well  done. 

962a.  Diana's  Return  from  the  Hunt,  The  cata- 
logue thinks  it  may  be  a  good  workshop  picture, 
though  Roases  thinks  the  figures  by  Rubens  and 
the  animals  by  Snyders.  It  is  a  good  picture  in 
colour  and  the  Diana  and  the  heads  back  of  her 
are  excellent.  They  are  good  enough  for  Rubens's 
own  hand.     He  probably  did  them. 

962.   The  Boar  Hunt,    With  a  woodland  landscape 

quite  different  from  the  Rainbow  landscape  in  the 
Wallace  Collection  or  its  companion  piece  in  the 
National  Gallery,  but  still  crude,  hard,  raw  in 
drawing  and  colour.  The  figures  and  animals  are 
only  a  very  little  better  than  the  trees  and  sky. 
There  is  good  action,  but  the  men,  horses,  and 
dogs  are  carelessly  done  though  not  conspicuously 
spotty  in  high  lights.  On  the  contrary,  they  keep 
their  place  in  the  setting  of  the  landscape  very 
well.    It  can  hardly  be  accepted  as  a  criterion  of 


192  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

the  Rubens  landscape.  He  may  have  planned  it, 
but  it  has  probably  been  worked  upon  by  pupils, 
especially  at  the  right  in  the  sky  and  distance. 

962c.    Mercury  and  Argus.     A  late  Rubens,   good 

in  colour  and  freely  done,  with  a  landscape  that 
matches  the  figures  very  well.  What  a  good  figure, 
that  of  Mercury!     It  is  a  bit  rubbed. 

962b.   Judgment  of  Paris.     It  is  probably  an  old 

copy — perhaps  a  school  copy — of  the  larger  picture 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London.  Study  the  paint- 
ing of  the  hair,  hats,  robes,  flesh.  It  is  a  much 
weaker  and  more  uncertain  brush  than  that  of 
Rubens.  Said  to  be  a  replica  but  it  is  more  likely 
a  plain  old  copy. 

964b.   Quos  Ego.     A  huge  picture,  originally  done 

for  decoration  upon  the  triumphal  arch  erected  in 
Antwerp  in  1635  for  the  entrance  of  the  Cardinal 
Infante  Ferdinand.  A  work  probably  executed  by 
pupils  in  the  workshop,  in  haste,  and  with  no  idea 
of  its  ever  being  seen  at  close  range. 

.964a.    — — Portrait   of  a    Woman    with    Crimped  Hair. 

Painted  in  a  way  that  still  shows  the  painter's 
brush,  though  it  has  been  a  little  hurt  by  cleaning. 
Probably  never  more  than  a  sketch  with  the  back- 
ground rubbed  in.  But  an  effective  portrait.  At 
one  time  thought  a  likeness  of  Helene  Fourment. 

965.   Bathsheba.    This   is   not   a   very   attractive 

Rubens.  It  is  genuine  enough,  and  probably  of 
his  late  period,  but  more  prosaic  than  the  subject 
calls  for.  The  composition  is  not  well  held  to- 
gether, the  negro  and  the  architecture  being  out  of 
it.  The  knees  and  legs  of  the  chief  figure  are  good, 
but  the  attendant  figure  above  is  coarse  and  hard 


RUISDAEL,  JACOB  VAN  193 

and  the  curtain  rather  stupid.  The  picture  lacks 
in  quality  all  through.  Probably  it  was  worked  on 
by  pupils  in  its  inception  and  later  on  by  restorers. 

986b.    Portrait  of  the  Painter's  Sons.     Said  by  the 

catalogue  to  be  a  copy  after  the  original  in  the 
Liechtenstein  Gallery  at  Vienna,  but  it  has  every 
indication  of  being  more  than  that  implies.  Look 
at  the  free  painting  of  the  bird,  the  hair,  the  gar- 
ments. The  faces  are  more  timidly  done.  If  a 
copy,  it  was  done  by  some  painter  of  skill.  It  is 
likely  a  genuine  Rubens  and  is  as  good  as  the  Liech- 
tenstein example. 

.492.  Ruisdael,  Jacob  van.  The  Hunt.  A  large  and 
*  important  Ruisdael  but  not  differing  materially 
from  his  usual  performance  except  that  it  is  more 
imposing.  It  is  the  same  convention  that  he  cus- 
tomarily shows  us,  with  perhaps  more  skill  shown  in 
the  handling  of  sky  reflection  in  the  water  and  a 
little  more  elaborate  handling  of  the  dead  beech 
in  the  foreground.  The  sky  is  stormy  and  again 
impressive.  Certainly  a  decorative  picture.  The 
animals  are  thought  to  be  by  A.  van  de  Velde. 

.494.  The  Cloister.  Of  interest  among  the  numer- 
ous Ruisdaels  here,  possibly  because  parts  of  it 
seem  done  from  nature  instead  of  out  of  the  paint- 
er's head.  He  was  striving  for  some  realistic  effect 
in  the  cloister  and  hill  at  the  left,  but  he  could  not 
refrain  from  lugging  in  his  white  tree  trunk  and 
formal  foliage  at  the  right  and  that  stormy  sky 
at  the  top. 

Landscape.     Attractive  for  the  path  through 


the  woods  but  slate-like  in  colour  and  dull  in  light. 
The  foliage  is  rather  crudely  painted. 


194  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

1502.    Jewish  Burying-Ground.      A  dramatic  com- 

*  position  with  its  central  spot  of  light,  but  it  is  not 
more  enjoyable  than  his  smaller  and  simpler  scenes. 
Still,  with  the  dark  sky  and  foreground,  the  light 
centred  on  the  white  tombs  and  repeated  in  the 
tree  and  waterfall,  it  makes  a  striking  if  forced 
landscape  effect.  All  of  the  foreground  is  exactly 
and  truthfully  drawn  and  the  background  is  shut 
out  by  storm-clouds.  How  very  like  a  landscape 
seen  in  a  dark  mirror!  Was  that  the  way  Ruisdael 
studied  nature?  His  pictures  suggest  as  much. 
Perhaps  the  best-known  Ruisdael  here,  and  a  cele- 
brated work. 

1496.   Castle  Bentheim.    Very  good,   especially  in 

*  the  castle  on  the  right  and  the  way  it  caps  the  hill. 
There  are  two  points  of  sight — a  peculiarity  of 
Ruisdael's  often  in  evidence.  The  far  view  down 
the  valley  at  the  left  is  attractive  and  the  sky  and 
foliage  are  better  than  usual. 

1504.  — — Canal  before  a  Village.  A  much-tortured  sur« 
face  (in  the  foliage)  from  many  repeated  and  in^ 
effective  strokes  of  a  small  brush.  The  result  is  a 
pettiness  in  the  work  that  is  depressing.  This  : 
less  marked  in  No.  1493,  but  both  landscapes  ai 
lacking  in  large  drawing  of  foliage  as  also  in  colouii 
and  light. 

1503.  Village  Back  from  the  Dunes.  Not  so  im- 
posing as  the  larger  Ruisdaels  (Nos.  1494,  1502), 
but  it  is  a  question  if  such  scenes  as  this  and  No.  \ 
1499  are  not  more  enjoyable  in  their  simplicity  and  ' 
naturalness.  The  sky  is  cold  and  does  not  match 
the  foreground  here,  but  the  latter  in  its  road  and 
fields  is  very  good. 


SARTO,  ANDREA  DEL  195 

1498.   Waterfall.    Here  are  the  usual  waterfall,  rock, 

white  tree,  and  dark  cloud  seen  in  so  many  Ruis- 
daels.  Such  pictures  are  turned  out  by  rote,  with 
some  decorative  effect,  but  they  are  seldom  well 
made  or  done  with  any  fine  feeling. 

1383.    Ruysdael,  Salomon  van.     Village  under  Trees, 

A  very  good  Ruysdael  done  in  the  manner  of  Van 
Goyen — in  fact,  so  good  that  one  wonders  how  Sal- 
omon van  Ruysdael  managed  to  do  it.  The  sky  and 
foreground  are  excellent,  the  trees  mannered.  No. 
1384  is  much  inferior  to  No.  1383. 

W)94.    Ryckaert    the    Younger,    David.    Interior,    It 

shows  rather  good  workmanship  in  the  heads  and 
the  costumes.  Ryckaert  occasionally  did  very  good 
work,  though  usually  he  is  commonplace.  See  also 
No.  1093. 

76.  SartO,   Andrea  del.     Marriage  of  St,   Catherine, 

A  slight  if  bright  Andrea,  with  pleasant  colour  and 
acceptable  light-and-shade,  but  not  a  great  effort 
either  technically  or  mentally.  The  drapery  of 
St.  Catherine  at  the  left  is  excellent  but  her  face 
and  hands  are  hurt  by  restoration.  The  picture 
is  not  in  good  condition. 

77.    The    Sacrifice    of    Isaac.      The    influence    of 

*     Michelangelo  is  apparent  in  the  drapery  and  the 

hands  of  Abraham  and  in  the  figure  of  Isaac.  It 
is  not  a  very  satisfactory  Andrea  in  its  sentiment 
though  well  done  technically  and  really  very  fine  in 
the  broadly  treated  landscape.  In  colour  it  is  not 
Andrea's  best  effort.  The  red  of  the  Abraham  is 
rather  too  high  in  key.  The  picture  is  somewhat 
injured.  A  smaller  and  more  pleasing  version  is 
at  Madrid  (No.  387). 


aOe  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

31.  Sienese  SchooL  Christ  in  the  Tomb.  With  in- 
teresting gold  work  in  the  oval  mat.  The  painter 
cannot  be  named  with  certainty. 

1727.    Steen,  Jan.      The   Dismissal  of  Hagar.     A  large 

*  and  very  fine  picture,  well  composed,  with  the  fig- 
ure of  Hagar  central  and  the  boyish  Ishmael  in  a 
red  coat  at  the  right.  It  is  very  well  painted.  No- 
tice the  drapery  of  the  Hagar  or  the  Ishmael.  Both 
types  are  well  characterised.     The  sentiment  is  not 

like  Steen,  nor  the  heavy  cattle,  nor  the  hot  tone, 

nor  the  sky  so  changed  in  the  colour  of  the  clouds. 
Still,  Steen  may  have  painted  the  picture.  Paint- 
ers do  not  always  repeat  themselves. 

.1726. Mother  and  Child.     This  is  as  little  in  the 

*  style  of  Steen's  usual  performance  as  No.  1727. 
But  what  a  charming  little  picture  it  is!  Look  at 
that  colour  spot  of  which  the  child's  face  forms  the 
centre.  How  fine  it  is !  The  mother  is  less  brilliant 
in  colours  but  just  as  excellent  in  characterisation. 
How  very  well  both  of  them  are  drawn  and  painted  I 
How  could  either  face  be  more  truthfully  and  yet 
beautifully  given?  Well  set  in  the  room  and  with 
a  good  landscape  seen  through  the  window. 

1077.  Teniers  the  Younger,  David.  The  Liberation 
of  St.  Peter.  There  are  several  examples  of  Ten- 
iers here  of  which  Nos.  1066,  1075,  1077,  1079  are 
representative  and  show  his  good  painting.  He  was 
a  master  of  the  brush  though  at  times  working 
hastily  and  carelessly. 

1829.  Terborch,  Gerard.  Officer  Writing.  The  colour 
is  foxy  (in  the  man  at  the  right)  and  not  pleasant. 
The  seated  figure  is  well  done  though  it  has  some 
of  the  constraint  of  a  copy.    The  room  is  lost  at 


TINTORETTO,  JACOPO  197 

the  back.  Not  a  good  Terborch  and  in  many  re- 
spects not  a  Terborch  at  all. 

L830.    Lady    Washing  Her  Hands.      With   charming 

*  colour  in  the  table-cloth,  the  wall  and  the  picture- 
frames  upon  it.  The  satin  gown  (the  centre  of 
light)  is  beautifully  done  not  only  in  texture  but  in 
drawing.  Notice  the  short  figure  of  the  maid  as 
a  foil  to  the  not  very  tall  lady.  Notice  also  the 
atmosphere  of  the  room,  the  placing  of  the  figures 
in  it,  and  the  painting  of  the  pewter. 

1833.   Officer  Reading  a  Letter,    Discoloured  and 

somewhat  hurt,  perhaps  by  repainting,  but  it  was 
probably  never  by  Terborch,  in  the  first  place.  It 
is  his  style  at  second  hand — that  is,  in  the  hands  of 
some  follower. 

.831.  The  Lute-Player,  It  is  over-crowded  with  fig- 
ures, tables,  and  architecture,  besides  being  super- 
ficial in  its  surfaces  and  pretty  in  its  colouring. 
Not  in  Terborch's  usual  manner  and  more  in  the 
style  of  Metsu.  It  was  probably  never  a  good  pic- 
ture and  is  now  hurt  by  cleaning. 

.832.    Lady  in  Her  Boudoir.      A  single  figure  in  a 

satin  gown,  silver-hued  against  red.  The  head  is 
badly  rendered  but  the  gown  is  very  good.  Prob- 
ably a  copy  of  the  satin-gowned  figure  in  the  pic- 
ture called  Paternal  Advice  in  the  Berlin  (and  also 
Amsterdam)  Gallery  (No.  791).  Look  closely  at 
the  timid  handling  of  the  red,  the  still-life,  the  dress, 
the  shoulder-piece. 

265a.  Tintoretto,  Jacopo  (Robust!) .  Lady  in  Mourn- 
ing. It  has  passed  as  a  Titian  and  is  perhaps  not 
unworthy  of  that  master,  though  it  is  a  little  coarse 
in  touch  and  possibly  a  little  nearer  Tintoretto, 


198  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

A  very  good  portrait,  whoever  did  it,  though  lack- 
ing in  that  charm  of  women  which  Tintoretto  usu- 
ally shows  us.  The  head  well  modelled,  the  figure 
well  rounded,  the  blacks  and  whites  well  handled. 

267.    Holy  Family  with  a  Donor,     It  looks  a  little 

frail,  as  though  some  one  in  the  workshop  had 
been  following  Tintoretto.  The  sea  and  sky  much 
better  than  the  heads.     The  picture  has  been  hurt. 

269.    A  Warrior  with  Three  Figures  in  a  Boat,    Here 

is  Tintoretto's  grace  carried  just  a  trifle  too  far. 
The  lady  at  the  left  is  curving  up  and  becoming  an 
illuminated  part  of  the  gondola  prow.  The  draw- 
ing is  a  little  frail  and  the  sea  merely  pretty.  It  is 
probably  by  some  Tintoretto  follower  or,  at  best, 
a  workshop  picture.  The  drawing  in  the  boy,  the 
warrior,  the  women,  the  wall,  the  sea  is  too  uncer- 
tain for  Tintoretto. 

266.  The  Archangel  St,  Michael  and  Satan,  Ap- 
parently in  rather  bad  condition,  with  far  too  much 
emphasis  in  the  high  lights  and  a  good  deal  of  re- 
storer's grey  in  the  wings.  There  is  a  good  down- 
ward movement  of  the  angel  group,  but  the  drawing 
is  queer  and  the  colour  is  now  lost.  It  was  possibly 
never  other  than  a  school  piece,  though  Tintoretto 
may  have  done  it  in  a  careless  or  tired  mood. 

168.  Titian  (Tiziano  Vecellio).  Madonna  and  Child 
*  with  Four  Saints.  An  early  work  of  Titian's  and 
rather  fine  in  the  types  of  both  the  Madonna  and 
the  Child.  The  face  of  the  Magdalen  is  sharp, 
wanting  in  the  third  dimension  (thickness),  and 
somewhat  out  of  value,  probably  through  too  much 
cleaning.  The  sky  and  clouds  are  a  little  hurt,  as 
also  the  St.  John  and  the  saint  back  of  the  Mag- 


TITIAN  (TIZIANO  VECELLIO)  199 

dalen;  but,  generally  speaking,  the  surface  is  in  fair 
condition  owing  to  the  picture  having  been  painted 
on  wood.  It  is  a  conversation  picture  of  balanced 
composition,  brilliant  in  colouring  and  perhaps  a 
little  weak  in  feeling  or  sentiment.  The  strip  ex- 
posed at  the  bottom  does  not  help  the  picture. 
Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle  thought  it  by  Andrea 
Schiavone. 

169.   The    Tribute^Money.      An   early  Titian,   on 

**     wood,   and   in   perfect   condition   save   for   some 

cleaning,  which  has  hurt  it  a  little.  A  most  valu- 
able picture  as  showing  Titian's  early  brush-work, 
free  at  least  from  repain tings.  The  face  and  hand 
of  Christ  have  been  rubbed  but  the  damage  is  not 
important.  The  work  is  a  joy  to  look  at,  with  or 
without  a  glass,  because  the  brush  of  Titian,  its 
freedom  and  accuracy,  its  skill,  its  wonderful  fusing 
power  can  be  traced  everywhere.  How  beautifully 
the  hair  is  done,  the  eyes  drawn,  the  nose  and  mouth 
modelled,  the  beard  and  moustache  brushed  in! 
What  superb  heads  with  substantial  bone  structure 
under  them!  And,  again,  what  beautifully  drawn 
hands !  The  colour  is  not  so  rich  here  as  it  was  later 
in  Titian's  career,  but  what  could  go  beyond  the 
beauty  of  the  flesh-notes?  For  the  mental  concep- 
tion, is  it  not  full  of  dignity,  calmness,  serenity? 
Notice  the  contrast  of  types  in  the  Christ  and  his 
questioner — the  mildness  of  the  one,  the  hard  ma- 
terialism of  the  other. 

170.   Lavinia  as  a  Bride,    A  late  work,  but  as  one 

goes  from  the  earlier  Tribute-Money  (No.  169) 
directly  to  this  picture  he  finds  a  vast  difference  in 
the  surfaces.  This  latter  has  a  pasty  and  uncer- 
tain surface,  with  the  whites  lacking  in  quality 


200  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

as  the  flesh-notes  in  value.  The  picture  is  much 
repainted  and  there  is  hardly  a  trace  of  Titian's 
brush  left  in  it.  Of  course  his  brush-work  changed 
as  he  grew  older  in  his  art,  but  it  never  arrived  at 
the  confused  state  here  shown.  This  is  the  re- 
storer's brush,  not  Titian's.  Originally,  no  doubt, 
a  fine  portrait.  See  the  alleged  Rubens  copy  of  it 
at  Vienna  (No.  844)  in  which  many  details  here 
unseen  are  shown. 

171.   Lavinia  as  a  Matron.     It  has  been  cleaned  and 

repainted  to  its  ruin,  somewhat  after  the  manner 
of  No.  170.  Notice  the  hands  and  the  pearls  above 
the  corsage  line.  At  the  left  is  something  that  may 
be  a  hat,  a  dog,  or  merely  dabs  of  incoherent  paint 
— across  the  gallery  it  seems  to  be  feathers.  There 
is  still  a  fine  pose  to  the  figure  and  some  colour. 

172.    Portrait  of  Antonio  Palnxa,     This  is  supposed 


♦ 


by  Mr.  Herbert  Cook  to  be  a  portrait  of  Palma 
Giovine  because  of  the  palm  held  in  the  left  hand 
and  the  box  of  colours  on  the  window-sill.  The 
picture  is  somewhat  injured  but  is  still  a  noble 
portrait  of  Titian's  late  time.  It  is  sombre  in  col- 
our but  compelling  in  its  dignified  poise.  The 
hand  and  the  sleeve  at  the  right  are  now  false  in 
value  and  the  sky  is  muddied,  as  also  the  grey 
ground  back  of  the  figure. 

173.    Portrait  of  Young  Woman  with  Vase.      Look 

closely  at  the  muffled  and  uncertain  drawing  of  the 
right  nostril,  the  left  eye,  the  over-painted  lips. 
Then  consider  the  left  hand  with  its  fingers,  the 
left  arm,  the  thumbed  and  ruined  beads  around 
the  neck,  the  flattened  vase.  It  may  have  been 
Titian  once  but  it  is  now  ruined  by  restoration. 


VELASQUEZ,  DIEGO  DE  SILVA  Y  201 

175.  Holy  Family.  The  Madonna  was  once  beau- 
tiful, no  doubt,  as  also  the  wife  of  the  donor  at  the 
right,  but  both  are  now  much  hurt.  Why  Titian? 
The  woman  in  white  is  the  only  Titianesque  figure 
and  the  landscape  does  not  suggest  him.  It  is 
probably  a  school  piece  of  some  sort. 

176.    Woman  in  Red  Dress.     This  is  still  rather  fine 

in  colour  but  the  face  and  figure  have  become  flat 
by  repainting.  It  is  now  hung  on  the  line,  where 
the  deformities  of  the  hands  cannot  be  avoided 
or  overlooked  and  the  ill-drawn  table  comes  into 
notice.  Probably  Titian  did  it,  but  it  is  not  in  his 
usual  style  save  in  the  well-drawn  sleeves  and  the 
fine  colour. 

42a.  Tura,  Cosimo.  St.  Sebastian.  It  seems  just  a 
little  more  suave  or  gracious  or  compromising  in 
method  than  we  usually  look  for  in  Cosimo  Tura, 
which  lends  colour  to  the  belief  of  some  critics  that 
it  is  by  a  Tura  follower.  In  its  type  and  drawing, 
however,  it  gives  indication  of  having  been  done 
by  Tura*s  own  hand.  The  shadows  of  the  flesh 
are  sooty.  Notice  the  small  figure  in  armour  and 
the  architecture  at  the  top. 

525.   Varotari,  Alessandro  (II  Padovanino).    Judith. 

Much  repainted  and  now  pulpy  in  the  drawing  (the 
hands  and  face),  but  it  still  has  a  nice  sense  of  col- 
our about  it.  It  is  an  example  of  the  early  Deca- 
dence at  Venice  but  not  utterly  worthless  for  that 
reason.    Padovanino  is  here  following  Titian. 

697.    Velasquez,    Diego   de   Silva   y.    Portrait  of  a 
**      Man.     It  is  probably  the  portrait  of  Juan  Mateos, 
the  King's  Master  of  the  Hunt.    The  head  is  ex- 
ceedingly well  done.    Notice  the  peculiar  curling 


202  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

hair,  the  eyes,  the  brows,  the  mouth  and  moustache, 
the  powerful  jaw,  the  twist  of  flesh  in  the  neck. 
What  a  well-rounded  and  substantial  body  though 
only  indicated!  The  hands  are  not  ill  drawn  or 
repainted  but  merely  sketched  in.  It  is  a  fine  por- 
trait of  a  powerful  man  and  more  than  likely  by 
Velasquez's  own  hand.  The  colour  suggests  the 
painter  of  the  portrait  at  Budapest  (No.  311)  and 
the  same  hand  that  did  the  Christ  Bound  to  the 
Column  in  the  London  National  Gallery  (No.  1148), 
but  the  handling  is  different. 

698.   Portrait  of  a  Man.     The  picture  has  a  fine 

silver-grey  colouring  but  that  is  all  that  saves  it. 
There  is  much  repainting  about  the  hair  on  the 
forehead  and  where  it  is  dragged  over  the  ear. 
The  eyes,  the  collar,  and  other  parts  are  now  badly 
drawn.  In  its  present  state  it  is  impossible  to  say 
whether  or  not  Velasquez  painted  it.  It  belongs, 
of  course,  in  his  school  and  is  a  very  acceptable 
portrait. 

699.    Portrait  of  the    Count    Olivares,     It  is   some 

sort  of  a  school  piece,  with  little  to  commend  it 
except  its  probable  likeness  to  the  original.  The 
drawing  of  it  is  loose,  the  handling  of  it  too  fluid, 
too  uncertain  for  Velasquez.  The  high-lights  on 
the  sleeve  and  the  greenish  pattern  are  crudely 
done.  Notice  the  weak  drawing  of  the  jaw,  the 
flat  nose,  and  the  bad  left  eye. 

221.  Venetian  School.  Two  Lovers,  A  picture  of 
considerable  interest  because  of  its  questionable 
authorship.  It  bears  earmarks  of  Romanino  or 
some  one  very  close  to  him.  The  Romanino  imi- 
tation of  Giorgione  is  apparent  in  the  shadows  and 
flesh  colour.    It  is  carelessly  drawn,  darkly  brown 


VERMEER  OF  DELFT,  JAN  203 

in  the  shadows,  with  a  landscape  interesting  and 
yet  perplexing.  See  the  catalogue  note  for  the 
different  attributions. 

Vermeer  (or  Van  der  Meer)  of  Delft,  Jan.  The 
Proposal.  One  of  the  largest  attributed  Vermeers 
known  and  not  altogether  satisfactory,  perhaps, 
because  of  its  size.  It  was  probably  influenced  or 
inspired  by  Carel  Fabritius.  Perhaps  Fabritius  him- 
self painted  it.  The  repainted  hands  of  the  man  are 
heavy  in  drawing,  the  table-cloth  is  erratic  and  too 
prominent,  the  colour  scheme  is  startling  and  not 
very  harmonious.  The  reds  and  yellows  are  bril- 
liant, high-keyed,  but  insufficiently  modulated  by 
shadow,  wanting  in  true  values,  and  not  in  tone  with 
the  figures  at  the  left.  And  the  whole  picture  lacks 
in  atmosphere.  The  figures  are  pushed  forward 
and  the  attempt  to  make  those  at  the  back  recede 
by  placing  them  in  shadow  is  not  effective.  An 
important  work,  surely,  but  not  suggestive  in  any 
way  of  Vermeer's  smaller  work  and  not  at  all  like 
the  large  figure  piece  at  The  Hague  (No.  406)  or 
the  Jesus  and  Martha  of  the  Coats  Collection. 
One  wonders  if  Vermeer  did  it.  The  pictures  as- 
signed to  him  are  too  varied  for  one  man,  and  this 
one  has  about  it  a  suggestion  of  Fabritius.  But  a 
fine  work.  Look  at  the  still-life  or  (independently 
considered)  the  rug. 

A  Girl  Reading.  A  singularly  beautiful  Ver- 
meer, quite  perfect  in  its  light,  its  colour,  and  its 
handling.  It  is  as  remarkable  for  its  truth  of  tone, 
beauty  of  colour,  and  atmospheric  setting  as  No. 
1335  is  not.  How  exactly,  yet  easily,  the  little  lady 
holds  her  place  not  only  in  the  linear  perspective  of 
the  room  but  in,  the  light  and   air  of  the  room  I 


204  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

Study  that  light  and  air  for  a  moment.  They  are 
wonderful.  The  curtain  rod  at  the  top  repeats  the 
picture-frame  and  is  slightly  jarring.  The  curtain 
at  the  back  of  the  window  is  just  right  in  value, 
as  is  also  the  lady's  face  reflected  in  the  window- 
glass.  A  very  simple  composition  but  full  of  dig- 
nity, colour  charm,  and  pictorial  beauty  of  the 
highest  kind,  showing  again  and  yet  again  how  a 
slight  theme  may  be  turned  into  great  art  in  the 
hands  of  genius.  Pull  it  to  pieces;  find  fault  with 
it  if  you  can.  It  is  about  perfect  and  is  one  of  the 
gems  of  the  gallery. 

1388a.    Vermeer  of  Haarlem,  Jan.     View  of  the  Dunes, 

With  more  truth  to  Holland  than  ever  the  Ruisdaels 
put  forth,  though  in  practically  the  same  key  of 
light.     It  has  the  breadth  and  sweep  of  a  Koninck. 

224.  Veronese,  Paolo  (Caliari).  Madonna  with  the 
**  Cuccina  Family.  This,  with  Nos.  225,  226,  and 
227,  was  done  for  the  Cuccina  Palace,  in  Venice, 
and  certainly  this  No.  224  was  done  by  Paolo's 
own  hand.  The  fine  portraits  of  the  family,  the 
lofty  Madonna  and  Child,  the  well-drawn  St. 
John,  the  columns,  the  curtain,  the  building,  the 
sky  all  indicate  Paolo  very  decisively.  It  is  a 
noble  picture  in  every  way.  Perhaps  the  finest 
part  of  it  is  the  kneeling  woman  in  red.  What  a 
figure,  head,  and  face!  And  what  a  wonderful 
dress!  The  patron  saint  in  white  above  her  is  a 
graceful  foil  and  the  figure  in  red  at  the  right  an 
equally  graceful  repetition.  The  picture  seems 
not  hurt  by  the  two  columns  cutting  through  it 
from  top  to  bottom  and  separating  the  saintly 
from  the  purely  human.  The  action  seems  to  flow 
on  between  the  columns..   Notice  the  little  chil- 


VERONESE,  PAOLO  205 

dren  in  the  striped  suits  and  their  disposition  in 
the  picture. 

225.    Adoration  of  Magi.    The  group  of  the  kings 

*      and  their  followers  comes  in  from  the  right  in  the 

form  of  a  wave — the  line  rising  to  the  shoulders  of 
the  negro  king,  then  falling  in  the  line  of  the  horse's 
neck  to  the  pages,  again  rising  with  the  kneeling 
king's  robe  and  carrying  up  by  the  Child  over  the 
head  of  Joseph.  A  noble  throng  of  people  in  rich 
robes,  attitudinising  a  bit  (as  the  kneeling  king, 
for  instance),  but  still  dignified,  pictorial,  magnifi- 
cent. Notice  the  drawing  of  the  robe  of  the  kneel- 
ing king,  or  the  red  robe  of  the  second  king,  or  the 
barbaric  garb  of  the  negro  king.  A  lofty  Madonna, 
a  graceful  Child,  a  sturdy  Joseph.  At  the  back  a 
suggestion  of  architecture  and  a  blue-green  sky. 
By  Paolo's  own  hand. 

226.    Marriage  of  Carta.     It  is  more  than  probable 

that  Paolo  lies  under  the  repainting  upon  this 
canvas,  but  one  can  get  at  him  only  by  faith  and 
much  groping  among  the  figures  and  their  draw- 
ing. Everything  seems  to  have  been  gone  over. 
Notice  the  legs  of  the  central  figure  in  dark  orange 
(with  the  wine-glass),  and  they  will  suggest  the 
rest  of  the  story.  Even  the  sky  and  architecture 
have  lost  their  tone  and  quality.  Originally  a 
handsome  group,  well  balanced  and  perhaps  start- 
ling in  light  and  colour.  The  architecture  at  the 
right  still  has  brilliancy  about  it  and  the  figures 
much  life  and  spirit.  It  is  now  only  Paolo  in  part 
and  possibly  was  not  more  than  that  originally. 
Referred  to  as  the  little  Marriage  in  Cana  to  dis- 
tinguish it  from  the  great  Marriage  in  Cana  in  the 
Louvre. 


206  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

227.    The    Way   to    Calvary.      The   group  has  little 

movement  owing  to  the  use  of  the  horizontal  line — 
something  that  Paolo  might  have  been  thought  too 
wise  to  have  employed  here.  The  figures  are  fairly 
well  done,  and  the  robes  of  the  Christ  are  rightly 
drawn,  but  there  is  a  feeling  of  smallness  in  the 
types  and  dulness  in  the  colours  that  speaks  against 
the  picture  being  by  Paolo's  hand.  The  little  white 
figures  in  the  distance  are,  too,  a  peculiarity  of 
Carlo  Caliari.  It  is,  however,  a  good  picture,  and 
probably  Paolo  designed  it  and  worked  upon  it 
in  part.  It  belongs  in  the  Cuccina  Palace  series, 
though  that  would  not  disprove  its  being  a  work- 
shop piece. 

229.   Finding  of  Moses,    The  types  here  are  smaller 

in  scale  than  in  No.  227,  below  it,  but  this  seems  to 
be  more  like  Paolo's  work  in  every  way.  The  two 
women  at  the  left  are  slight,  perhaps  just  a  little 
too  elegant,  but  nobly  seen,  well  drawn,  and  well 
painted.  Just  so  with  the  kneeling  figure  with  the 
child,  or  the  man  with  the  halberd,  or  the  landscape 
at  the  back.  It  may  not  be  by  Paolo,  but  it  is,  at 
any  rate,  well  done.  Such  works  as  this,  with  its 
companion  piece  (No.  228),  were  no  doubt  much 
worked  upon  by  pupils  in  the  shop. 

236.    Portrait  of  Daniele  Barharo.      A  commanding 

*  portrait,  given  with  great  dignity,  simplicity,  and 
good  taste.  How  simply  but  nobly  the  man  rests, 
looking  straight  at  us,  without  fear  or  reproach. 
Notice  the  well-drawn,  aristocratic  hand  and  the 
handsome  columns.  It  is  less  injured  than  many 
other  portraits  here — is,  in  fact,  in  very  good  shape. 
An  excellent  work. 

231.   Crucifixion.    A  small  picture  by  some  follower 

of  Paolo.    It  is  not  badly  grouped  in  the  figures 


WEYDEN,  ROGER  VAN  DER  207 

and  the  colour,  though  cool,  is  very  good.  It  may 
be  a  copy  or  a  variation  of  some  Veronese  picture. 

230.   The  Good  Samaritan.     The  landscape  is  rather 

maze-like,  but  good,  nevertheless,  and  the  figures 
come  in  as  colour  spots  very  well;  but  it  is  ques- 
tionable if  Paolo  had  anything  to  do  with  putting 
them  in. 

228.  The  Centurion  of  Capernaum.  It  is  a  com- 
panion piece  to  No.  229  and  yet  it  does  not  seem  to 
be  by  the  same  hand.  It  is  probably  a  school  piece 
executed  by  pupils  after  Paolo's  design. 

1544.    Vries,    Abraham    de.     Portrait   of  a   Man.    A 

smooth-surface  portrait  but  done  with  very  pre- 
cise drawing  and  easy  handling.  The  light  and 
shade  of  it  are  good  as  also  the  characterisation. 
Not  a  marvel,  but  just  good  Dutch  portraiture. 

1381.  Vroom,  Cornells.  Wood  Road.  A  landscape 
*  almost  as  modern  in  spirit  as  a  Dupr^  or  a  Rousseau. 
What  a  fine  sky!  Notice  the  way  it  is  brushed  in. 
Also  the  depth  of  the  forest.  No.  1382  is  like  it 
but  perhaps  not  so  well  done.  They  are  much 
better  as  the  simple  transcripts  of  things  seen  than 
the  conventional  landscapes  of  Ruisdael  or  Hob- 
bema.  They  have  been  attributed  to  Vermeer  of 
Haarlem  and  are  not  too  certainly  placed  now, 
but  their  value  as  art  is  not  affected  thereby. 

800.  Weyden,  Roger  van  der,  Workshop  of.  Christ 
on  the  Cross.  A  school  piece,  no  doubt,  but  a  good 
picture  and  in  the  Van  der  Weyden  style.  It  is 
fine  in  its  tragic  sentiment,  its  colour,  and  its  sim- 
ple little  landscape.  Notice  the  bow  of  promise  in 
the  sky  back  of  the  figure  of  Christ. 


208  THE  DRESDEN  GALLERY 

1491b.  Wynants,  Jan.  The  Road.  A  very  good  Wy- 
nants  in  light,  air,  distance,  and  ensemble.  It  seems 
all  of  a  piece,  with  foreground  and  background  well 
held  together,  which  is  not  always  the  case  with 
his  larger  work. 

Ysenbrant.    See  Isenbrant. 

696.    Zurbaran,  Francisco  de.     Election  of  the  Pope. 

One  of  the  St.  Bonaventura  series  of  which  there 
are  two  canvases  in  the  Louvre  and  one  in  the 
Berlin  Gallery.  It  is  well  drawn  in  the  ecclesiastical 
gowns  as  in  the  hands  of  the  kneeling  St.  Bona- 
ventura. The  figures  are  well  grouped  but  a  little 
false  in  value — that  is  to  say,  the  cardinals  in  the 
background  have  about  the  same  value  or  intensity 
of  red  as  the  table-cloth  in  the  foreground.  With 
dark  shadows  and  some  blackness  of  ground. 


INDEX  OF  PICTURES  BY  NUMBERS 


7. 
8 
9 
13 
14 
15 
20. 
21. 
22. 
31. 
41. 
42. 


Angelico,  Fra. 
Botticelli. 

Credi. 


Piero  di  Cosimo. 

Capponi. 

Florentine  School, 

Sienese  School. 

Pinturicchio. 

Palmezzano. 
42a.  Tura. 
43.   Cossa. 
45 
46 
48 
49 
51. 
52. 
53. 
59a 
60. 
611 
G3J 

64a.  Catena. 
68.    Bevilacqua. 

Franciabigio. 

Sarto,  A.  del. 


Roberti. 

Francia. 

Mantegna. 

Antonello  da  Messina. 
Bellini,  School  of. 
Barbari,  Jacopo  de'. 
Previtali. 

Cima. 


75. 
76 
77 
80. 
93. 
102. 


Bacchiacca. 

Raphael. 

Sebastiano  del  Piombo. 


>  Girolamo  da  Carpi. 


103.   Romano,  Giulio. 

-^j^  >  Baroccio. 

113.    Bagnacavallo. 
123.   Mazzolino. 

}2^}Dossi. 

131.   Dossi,  School  of. 

132-1 

135    \  Garofalo. 

140    J 

142 

144 

149a.  Ferrarese  School. 

150- 

155 

168- 

173 

175 

176 

185. 

186. 

188- 

192 

194a.  Lotto. 

201.    Morando. 

201a.  Bartolommeo  Veneto. 

203] 

204  >  Bordone. 

205] 

208.   Bonifazio. 

221.    Venetian  School. 

223.   Farinato. 


Correggio. 


Titian. 


Giorgione. 
Giorgione,  School  of. 

Palma  Vecchio. 


209 


210 


INDEX 


Tintoretto. 


224-1 

231    [  Veronese,  P. 

236    J 

249.    Fasolo. 

252a.  Bassano,  Jacopo. 

265a' 

266 

267 

269 

276.   Greco,  II. 

281 

282  \  Bassano,  Leandro. 

283 

323 

324 

329 

330 

609. 

625. 


Reni,  Guido. 


Dolci. 

Varotari. 
601a.  Guardi. 
604.   Belotto. 
676.   Roelas. 

683  /  ^^^^^^• 

696.   Zurbaran. 

697] 

698  \  Velasquez. 

699] 

703b  ] 

704  MuriUo. 

705  J 

721.    Poussin. 

ygj  >  Claude  Lorraine. 

799.  Eyck,  Jan  van. 

800.  Weyden,  R.  van  der 
808.   Flemish  School. 

809a  I  ^^^^®J  Juste  van. 


SlljOrley. 

831.  Beuckelaer. 

839.  Isenbrant. 

840.  Dutch  School. 
843.  Engelbrechtsen. 

846.  Dutch  School. 

847.  Moro. 

892.  Brueghel theElder,  Jan, 

955- 

958a 

960 

962 

962a 

962b 

962c 

964a 

964b 

965 


Jordaens. 


Rubens. 


1009- 

1012 

1017- 

1021a 

1022 

1023a 

1023b 

1023c 

1023d 

1024 

1025 

1027 

1028 

1029 

1030 

1033 

1034 

1035 


Dyck,  Anthony  van. 


INDEX 


211 


>  Gysels. 


Mierevelt. 


Vermeer  of  Delft. 


\  Goyen, 


Netscher. 


Van. 


JOSSJBrouwer. 

1077.    Teniers. 

1094.   Ryckaert. 

1158 

1159 

1225.   Heem. 

1258.   Knupfer. 

1315  1 

1316 

1317 

1335 

1336 

1338a 

1338c 

13471 

1351] 

1359}^^^- 

1371.   Heda. 

1381.   Vroom. 

1383.   Ruysdael,  S.  van. 

1388a.  Vermeer  of  Haarlem. 

1390 

1391. 

1398.   Ostade,  A.  van. 

1491b.  Wynants. 

14921 

1494 

1496 

1498   It..,       ,      t 

- -^  }  Rmsdael,  J.  van. 

1502 
1503 
1504 
1544. 


1556- 


Rembrandt. 


1571 

1573 

1575 

1582.   Lievens. 

1587.   Backer. 


3l 

^  >  Rembrandt,  School  of. 


1589a  }^°^^^'®- ^^• 
1591.    Fabritius,  B. 
1595.   Heist,  Van  der. 


1600 


Flinck. 


Eeckhout. 


Potter. 


Hobbema. 


Poorter. 


Vries. 


1602 
16031 

1604  Bol. 

1605  J 

1612a.  Koninck,  P. 

1618 

1618a 

1629 

1630 

1664a  1 

1665    j 

1671.   Neer,  E.  van  der. 

1704' 

1720 

1726 

1727 

1732 1  , ,  ^ 
j73g|Met8U. 

1742.    Mieris. 
1782.    Cuyp,  A. 

1791  1 

1792  iOelder 
1792a  J 
1805.   Jongh. 


Dou. 


Steen. 


212 


INDEX 


Terborch. 


Everdingen. 


1829- 

1832 

1835 

1838 

1869 

1870  \  Durer. 

1871 

1888.    Breu. 

1889 

1890 

1901.   Maler  von  Ulm. 

1905.   German  School. 


>  Holbein  the  Younger. 


1906E 

1906F 

1906G 

1906H 

1908 

1913 

1914 

1915 

1916a 

1917 

1946. 

1952. 


Cranach  the  Elder. 


Cranach  the  Younger. 
Cranach,  School  of. 


393594 


uNivERsrry  of  caufornia  ubrary 


